Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard Sri Raghuvansh Misra, learned counsel for the petitioners.
The dispute lies in a very short campass. The petitioners claim themselves to be tenants of a premises the land whereof was Nazool land. The said rights over the Nazool property have been converted into free hold in favour of the 7th respondent. The petitioners were tenants but they have not succeeded in getting free hold rights over the land and when they were under threat of eviction from the respondent no. 7 they filed Original Suit No. 755 of 1997 that has been decreed by the trial court on 18th October, 2012. In paragraph 22 of the writ petition the petitioners have categorically stated that the said judgment has neither been challenged and it was allowed to attain finality. It is urged that the respondent no. 7 in connivance with the Tehsilder respondent no. 3 and 4 have attempted to dislodge the petitioners without taking recourse to law and the Tehsildar respondent no. 3 and 4 have both issued orders respectively on 9th February, 2018 and 22nd May, 2018 calling upon the petitioners through an administrative order to remove their effects. The petitioners have been forcibly evicted.
Prima facie we find that the aforesaid action of the two Tehsildars does not appear to be in any conformity in law inasmuch as we do not find any jurisdiction vested in them to issue such notices of eviction through administrative orders at the instance of respondent no. 7. Consequently, the petitioners have made out a case for entertaining the petition as well as grant of an interim relief.
Issue notice to the 7th respondent returnable at an early date. Steps within a week.
Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notices for the respondents 1 to 6. The respondent no. 3 and 4 shall file their personal affidavits explaining as to under what circumstances they have issued the said notices.
In view of the aforesaid position that emerges prima facie a forcible eviction has taken place in spite of decree of a competent court on 26.5.2018. Consequently, show cause is issued to all the respondents to explain as to why the petitioners' possession be not restored in the premises keeping in view the principles laid down Under Section 144 C.P.C. inasmuch as there is nothing on record to indicate that the petitioners had been dispossessed in accordance with law.
Until further orders of the court status quo with regard to the property shall be maintained.
List immediately after three weeks.
Order Date :- 25.9.2018 Masarrat