JUDGMENT :

J.J. MUNIR, J.

1. Heard Mr. Swapnil Kumar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri A.K. Trivedi, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

2. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has engaged the attention of this Court regularly during the past twelve years. The transaction, out of which this writ petition has arisen, the cause of action involved and the relief claimed, are all very unusual and unconventional; but not without good reason.

3. The petitioner, who has prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus, directing the Judge, Small Cause Court to ensure handing over of actual physical possession of the suit property, subject matter of the decree dated 14.11.1991 passed by the said Judge in SCC Suit No. 108 of 1989, has not chosen this very unusual course without a most astounding situation he is confronted with. He has further prayed that a mandamus be issued to the respondents, by which apparently he means respondent No. 2, the State of Uttar Pradesh through the Collector, Agra, directing them to pay damages to the petitioner @ Rs. 10,000/- per month, with effect