- (1.) R. A. Sharma, J. Five persons have filed this writ petition for writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to demolish the premises on plot No. 179/2 area 10 decimals of village Churampur, pargana Dehat Amanat, Tahsil and District Varanasi and not to evict them therefrom. Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 are Collector, Additional Collector and Deputy Collector (South) Varanasi respectively. Senior Superintendent of Police, Circle Officer Cantt and Station Officer Incharge Police Station Maduwadeeh, Varanasi are respondents No. 4, 5, and 6. Sri Sewa Lal has been impleaded as respondent No. 7.
(2.) . Respondent No. 7 has filed a Civil Suit No. 652 of 1993 in the Court of Civil Judge, Varanasi for declaration that he is the owner of premises on plot No. 179/2 of the village mentioned hereinabove (hereinafter referred to as the premises ). Further prayer for injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with his possession over the said plot, has also been made. In this suit only Gaon Sabha of the said village has been impleaded as defendant. Petitioners No. 1 and 2 moved an application for impleadment in that suit which was rejected by the trial Court. They, therefore, filed a civil revision No. 190 of 1994 before this Court, challenging the order rejecting their application for impleadment. In the revision an interim order was passed by this Court staying the further proceeding in civil suit. However, this revision was dismissed in default on 18. 7. 1995. Both the petitioners claim to have made application for recall of the aforesaid order, which has not been decided so far. In the civil suit respondent No. 7 moved applications for permission to repair the premises in dispute and for police help in that connection. Both these prayers were granted by the Civil Court and the orders for police help for repair of the premises were accordingly passed. Deputy Collector (South) Varanasi, respondent No. 3, wrote a letter dated 22. 4. 1995 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition) to the Superintendent (City) Varanasi asking for police help to the respondent No. 7, so as to enable him to demolish the premises and construct a new one in its place. It appears that no action was taken on the above letter. Respondent No. 3, therefore, passed an order dated 15. 6. 1995 (Annexure-10 to the writ petition) directing the Naib Tahsildar (City) Varanasi to be personally present with the police help on the spot, so as to enable respondent No. 7 to demolish the premises and construct a new one in its place. Apprehending immediate demolition of the premises in view of the above order of the respondent No. 3 petitioners have filed this writ petition for the reliefs mentioned before. On 17. 8. 1995 we passed an interim order directing the respondents not to demolish the premises and not to interfere with the possession of the petitioners, in case they are found in its possession except in accordance with law.
(3.) RESPONDENT No. 7 has moved an application for recall of the above interim order. Further prayer for dismissing the writ petition has also been made therein. As the application contains prayer for recall of interim order dated 17. 8. 1995 learned Single Judge, before whom the said application was moved, was of the view that the above order can be recalled by the same Bench which has passed it and has accordingly directed the application to be listed before us. An interim order passed by a Division Bench can be recalled by a learned Single Judge and it is not necessary that such matter be placed before the same Bench which has passed that order. But when an interim order has been confirmed/made absolute, it can be recalled by the same Bench which has confirmed it. We are, however, not sending back the case to the learned Single Judge because of the request made by learned counsel for both the parties, for deciding the petition finally, because pendency of the writ petition in this Court may cause embarrassment to the Civil Court where suits relating to the premises are pending. We are, therefore, deciding this petition.;