- (1.) I have heard Sri Amulya Ratan Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel and Counsel for the Gaon Sabha. Considering the nature of the order which this Court intends to pass, no notice is issued to respondent No. 4 and the writ petition is taken up for final disposal with the consent of learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) Through this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: (i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to restore possession of the petitioner over part of the patta land situated over Plot No. 190 area 0.03 decimal situated in Village Babhnauli, Post Office Mansa Chhapar, District Kushinagar. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to restrain the respondent No. 4 from interfering in peaceful possession of petitioner over part of the patta land in plot No. 190 area 0.03 decimal situated in village Babhnauli, Post Office Mansa Chhapar, District Kushinagar. (iii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to restrain the respondent No. 2 to pass appropriate and reasoned orders on the petitioner application filed before him in respect of possession over part of the Patta Land in plot No. 190 area 0.03 decimal situated in village Babhnauli, Post Office Mansa Chhapar, District Kushinagar. (iv) Issue any other writ order or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. (v) Award cost of the writ petition to the petitioner.
(3.) The facts giving rise to this case are that it appears the petitioner was granted a lease for housing side over an area of 0.03 decimal over Plot No. 190 in Village Babhnauli, Post Office Mansa Chhapar, District Kushinagar. The aforesaid land was given on lease on 3.1.1974 in favour of the petitioner's husband namely Sudharshan. After allotment, on the some portion of the land, a small house was constructed by the husband of the petitioner and the petitioner along with husband and children started to live therein. Thereafter the vacant area of the lease land has been forcefully occupied by the respondent No. 4. The petitioner herein it appears has filed an application under section 122-D of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as Act) for restoration of possession.;