ORDER

In paragraph-1 of the writ petition, the petitioner has made the following prayers: –

“1. That the petitioner seeks indulgence of this Hon’ble Court for the following reliefs: –

(A) A writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, direction, quashing the order dated 22.9.2011 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Araria in Sanchika Sankhya 24-4/11 directing the Executive Officer, Nagar Parishad, Araria to unseal the shop of room no.32 of Radha Krishna Seva Sangh, Araria and hand over the same to Ram Lakhan Ram and impliedly rejecting the claim of the petitioner.

(B) A writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order, direction commanding the respondents to act in accordance with law and not to disturb the petitioner’s possession, articles and materials lying in shop of the said room no.32 of Radha Krishna Seva Sangh, Araria.

(C) Any other relief to which the petitioner is found entitled to.”

2. The case of the petitioner is that he is a tenant of Shree Radha Krishan Seva Sangh, Thakurbari Road, Araria (in short “the Sangh”) since long.

3. The Sangh issued a notice to the petitioner on 21.11.2005 asking him to vacate the room in which he was running a shop by 24.11.2005 so that after demolishing the old construction a new construction be erected. In the notice issued by the Sangh it was clearly mentioned that after the new construction the petitioner would be allotted a new shop. In compliance of the notice issued by the Sangh, the petitioner vacated shop no.1 to facilitate a new construction and deposited Rs.1,30,000/- for the allotment of newly constructed room. The other occupants of the rooms had deposited Rs.80,000/- only as the size of their rooms was smaller. On completion of the new construction, the petitioner’s old room was divided into two parts and numbered as shop no.32 and 33. The petitioner was allotted room no.33 only. He protested against the allotment of smaller size room before the Sangh. The Sangh rectified its mistake and asked him to take possession of room nos.32 and 33 and, accordingly, he took possession of both the rooms and started doing business from there. Subsequently, the Secretary of the Sangh filed an application before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Araria on the basis of which a proceeding under section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short “the Code”), being Case No.327M of 2006, was initiated. In the said proceeding, by order dated 24.7.2006, the Executive Magistrate was directed to enquire into the matter and submit his report. Sri J.K.Dwivedi, an Executive Magistrate, Araria enquired into the matter and submitted his report on 11.8.2006. The Executive Magistrate, in his report, stated that the petitioner was in possession of Room nos. 32 and 33 from before initiation of the proceeding under Section 144 of the Code. He had kept his articles and materials in the said rooms. The size of the rooms is 9’ x 11’ whereas the size of the room possessed by the petitioner in the old construction was 17’ x 16’. The report further goes to suggest that the Sangh had realized Rs.1,30,000/- from the petitioner whereas, the other occupants of the rooms in the same building had paid Rs.80,000/- only. In the report, it has been contended that in order to resolve the dispute, the Sangh should allot some other room adjacent to the room of the petitioner to respondent no.6. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Araria dropped Case No.327M of 2006 by his order dated 5.9.2006 in the light of the recommendation made by the Executive Magistrate. Subsequently, another proceeding i.e., Case No.1724M of 2006 was initiated at the instance of the petitioner since he was constantly being threatened by the Sangh and, accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the Sangh and its officers and the officer incharge, Araria was directed to maintain status quo. The second proceeding initiated by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Araria was also subsequently dropped by order dated 19.12.200