By the Court.—Heard Sri Anil Kishore Sharma and Sri Saroj Kumr Yadav, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Umesh Vats, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and Smt. Subhash Rathi, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the District Magistrate.

2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition praying for the following relief:

“(i) Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS and thereby command the respondents, particularly the official respondents to restore the possession of the petitioner over gata No. 211 area 0.450 hectare and gata No. 232 area 0.336 hectare situated in Mauja Mandvivar (Pachhatiya) Post Haveli, Tesil Sadar, District Jaunpur, over which the petitioner has been illegally evicted forcibly in pursuance to the order Special Secretary to the Chief Minister, without following the procedure of law even during the pendency of civil litigations between the parties before the Civil Court and Revenue Court in respect of the same properties.

(ii) Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS and thereby issue suitable directions for initiation of disciplinary proceedings against respondent Nos. 7 to 11 for holding the law Courts in contempt by their act and conduct under show of the colour of their office.

(iii) Issue any order Writ, order or direction in the nature, as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(iv) Award the cost of Writ Petition to the petitioner.”

3. The writ Court entertained the writ petition on the premise that the petitioner was a valid purchaser of the property in question in which possession was given after execution of the sale-deed as is depicted in the sale-deed itself.

4. It was alleged that the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 are claiming to be the heirs of the erstwhile seller/original tenure holder and that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 had also filed a Suit under Section 229-B of the UP ZA & LR Act, which was eventually dismissed as withdrawn. It was further alleged that respondent Nos. 4 and 5 filed a written complaint to the local Minister praying that anti social elements and Mafia have grabbed that property and therefore, prayed that the possession may be restored through police force. The Minister in turn wrote a letter to the Chief Minister and the Special Secretary in the office of the Chief Minister made an endorsement on the said letter of the Minister directing the District Magistrate, Jaunpur to take action in accordance with law. This letter to the Chief Minister is dated 26th of June, 2017. The order of the Special Secretary is dated 29th of June, 2017.

5. The petitioner alleges that the police force forcibly dispossessed the petitioner on 19th of July, 2017 and the possession of Gata Nos. 232 and 230, on which a residential house was located, was given to respondent No. 4 and 5. The present writ petition was accordingly filed praying that his possession should be restored and disciplinary proceedings should be initiated against the officials.

6. This Court issued notices to the District Magistrate as well as to respondent Nos. 4 and 5, who have filed a counter-affidavit. The counter-affidavit of the respondents revealed a different scenario bringing out new facts which were not indicated in the writ petition. The background leading to the filing of the writ petition can be summarized in the following manner:

7. The original tenure holder was Khaderan Maurya, who was the father of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 and father-in-law of respondent No. 6 and grandfather of grandson namely Pankaj Maurya. Khaderan Maurya was murdered on 13th June, 2001 by the daughter-in-law, namely, Nirchhala Devi-respondent No. 6 and grandson, namely, Pankaj Maurya. They were eventually convicted with life imprisonment by a judgement of the trial Court dated 4.9.2002 and, in this regard, an appeal is pending before the High Court.

8. During the pendency of the appeal, the grandson-Pankaj die