By the Court.—Heard Sri Ankush Tandon, learned counsel for the petitioner No. 3.

2. This is a writ petition filed by three petitioners namely Smt. Vijai Jain, Smt. Bibi Jain and the third petitioner has been transposed as a co-petitioner in terms of the order of the Division Bench dated 9th May, 2007 passed on Impleadment Application No 114283 of 2005.

3. At the very outset, it may be placed on record that the first two writ petitioners are represented by Sri A.K. Singh, Advocate who has not turned up when the case has been called out.

4. Learned counsel for the newly impleaded petitioner No. 3 Smt. Kusum Mehrotra, Sri Ankush Tandon submits that the petitioner No. 2 has died.

5. The background in which the petitioner No. 3 came to be impleaded as such is interesting.

6. The writ petition was originally filed by only two petitioners Smt. Vijai Jain and Smt. Bibi Jain assailing the order passed by the District Magistrate on 18th February, 2005 whereby in exercise of the powers vested in him under Section 14 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, the property in question being house No. 48/123 Generalganj, District Kanpur Nagar has been attached. The District Magistrate had issued notices on 27.9.2004 to which a reply was given by the first two writ petitioners in terms of Section 15 and the same was rejected on 18th February, 2005.

On the presentation of the writ petition on the very first day, the following interim order was passed on 25th April, 2005.

“We have heard Shri A.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel appearing for respondents. Three weeks thereafter is allowed to the petitioner to file rejoinder-affidavit.

List thereafter.

Until further orders of this Court, the respondents directed to release the house No. 48/123 Generalgaj Puchkucha, Kanpur Nagar in favour of the petitioners forthwith.”

7. Consequently, the direction was to release the premises in favour of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2.

A counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of the State sworn by Mr. Ashok Kumar Ravat, Inspector and Station House Officer, P.S. Cant, District-Kanpur Nagar where taking notice of the interim order dated 25th April, 2005 an averment has been made in paragraph No. 5 of the affidavit that the petitioners have been handed over possession on 13th June, 2005 in compliance of the orders of the High Court.

8. This was done on the orders passed by the then District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar on 25th May, 2005.

It appears that the petitioner No. 3 claiming herself to be the statutory tenant portion of the premises namely first and third floor of the said house came to know of the said proceedings and then filed a Writ Petition No. 38768 of 2005 that was dismissed on 12th May, 2005 with liberty to the petitioner No. 3 to move an application in the present writ petition. The judgment is extracted hereinunder :

“This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to give possession to the petitioner of the first floor, second floor and third floor of which the petitioner claims to be a tenant.

It has been stated in the petition that against the son of the landlady an order under Section 14(1) of the U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act was passed in which house No. 48/123 in which the petitioner is a tenant was attached and sealed after forcibly ousting the petitioner and other members of her family. In this regard the petitioner has moved various applications before the District Magistrate. In the meantime, the landladies had also filed a writ petition in this Court being Writ Petition No. 31220 of 2005 in which an interim order was passed on 25th April, 2005 directing the respondents to release house No. 48/123 in favour of the petitioners forthwith.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once the hous