Maheshwari Devi And 9 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Housing ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 12067 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 2
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2574 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Maheshwari Devi And 9 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Housing Urban Planning Deptt., Lko. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Ram Ujagir Verma,Raj Narayan,Sachin Verma
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Kumar Ayush,Ratnesh Chandra
 

 
Hon'ble Rajan Roy,J.

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

Heard.

Petitioners have filed this petition seeking following reliefs:

"a) a writ order or directions in the nature of mandamus commanding the opp. parties to restore the possession of the petitioners of the disputed property mentioned in the para 3 of the writ petition.

b) a writ order or directions in the nature of Mandamus to punish the opp. party no. 4 as per law for the arbitrary and illegal act on the disputed property.

c) any other orders which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioners."

Petitioners had filed a suit bearing No. 241 of 2006 seeking prohibitory injunction against the opposite parties herein. The said suit was dismissed for want of prosecution on 27.08.2021. Thereafter, an application for restoration of the proceeding was filed by the petitioners, as claimed, on 04.10.2021 which is said to be pending even today. In the meantime, an eviction order was passed against the petitioners under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 on 30.11.2015 which was challenged by the petitioners in appeal and thereafter it was challenged by means of Writ Petition No. 10608 (MS) of 2016 which was dismissed on 13.05.2016 with certain observations. Petitioners' suit itself having been dismissed for want of prosecution on 27.08.2021 any order passed in Writ Petition No. 5490 (MS) of 2009 arising out of temporary injunction proceedings therein, would have no consequence. Moreover, even the said order gave limited protection to the petitioner until eviction order is passed under the Public Premises Act, which in fact was passed on 30.11.2015 against which the proceedings have attained finality.

In this view of the matter, the petitioners can pursue pending restoration application in the suit but we do not see any reason to interfere with the dispossession of the petitioners on 30.07.2022 by the Lucknow Development Authority as there was no legal restrain for them.

We have perused the last paragraph of judgment dated 13.05.2016 which says that dismissal will not prejudice the suit proceedings pending, but, as of now there are no such proceedings nor were they pending on 30.07.2022.

Needless to say that our order will also not come in the way of the restoration proceedings and if the suit is restored, if at all it is restored, then, it will also not prejudice the suit proceedings and the rights of the parties therein.

The petition is dismissed.

[Manish Kumar, J.] [Rajan Roy, J.]

Order Date :- 20.4.2023

Santosh/-