IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 6292 of 2024 Bhupendra Singh, S/o Late Malik Ram @ Malik Ram Chhabra, R/o Addi Bungalow (Bhadani Road), Ward No. 09, New Ward No. 13, Jhumri Telaiya Nagar Parishad, PO-Jhumri Telaiya, PS-Telaiya, District-Koderma … … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. The House Rent Controller-cum-Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Koderma 3. Saroj Devi Jain, W/o Late Jai Kumar Jain, R/o Jain Gali, Near Jain Mandir, Ward No. 05, New Ward No. 15, Jhumri Telaiya Nagar Parishad, PO-Jhumri Telaiya, PS-Telaiya, District-Koderma 4. Jain Transport Agency represented through Abhishek Jain, S/o Late Dhan Kumar Jain, R/o Jain Gali, Near Jain Mandir, Ward No. 05, New Ward No. 15, Jhumri Telaiya Nagar Parishad, PO-Jhumri Telaiya, PS-Telaiya, District-Koderma … … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Mr. Mohan Kumar Dubey, AC to AG ----- 03/30.01.2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Eviction Suit No. 07/2023 has been filed by the petitioner on 10.06.2023 seeking eviction of the respondent nos. 3 and 4 from the premises in question invoking Section 19(1)(a)(c) & (d) of the Jharkhand Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 2011”). Subsequently, the said respondents appeared and filed their written statement(s) on 09.12.2023. After filing of the written statement(s), the said respondents are not being represented in the said case and vide order dated 02.09.2024, the respondent no. 2 – the House Rent Controller-cum- Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Koderma has framed the issues ex-parte. The petitioner has also preferred an application under Section 27 of the Act, 2011 for directing the respondent nos. 3 and 4 to deposit the arrears of rent. Moreover, he has filed an application under 2 W.P.(C). No. 6292 of 2024 Section 33(3) of the Act, 2011 requesting inter alia to dispose of the said case at the earliest. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent no. 2 has neither passed any order on the petitioner’s applications nor has disposed of the case. Under of the said compelling circumstance, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition. 2. Mohan Kumar Dubey, AC to AG appearing on behalf of the respondent nos. 1 and 2, submits that the said case will be disposed of by the respondent no. 2 in accordance with law without any further delay, if there is no other legal impediment. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of prayer made by the petitioner in the present writ petition, without making any opinion on the merit of the case, the respondent no. 2 is directed to expedite the hearing of Eviction Suit No. 07/2023 and to dispose of the same in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the respondent nos. 3 and 4 without any undue delay. It is made clear that the respondent no. 2 shall not give unnecessary adjournments in the said case. 4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of Manish (Rajesh Shankar, J.)