Public authorities are bound by their own records and are estopped from denying the rights of an established beneficiary after prior judicial and administrative acknowledgement, especially following the eviction of unauthorized occupants from the premises.

JUDGMENT :

Indrajeet Shukla, J .

Order on Civil Misc. Impleadment Application No.3/2024

1. None appears to press the application for impleadment.

2. Impleadment application is rejected.

Order on Civil Misc. Substitution Application No.8/2026

1. Application for substitution is allowed.

2. Let necessary correction /amendment be carried out.

Order on Writ Petition

1. Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pradeep Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. Present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been instituted by petitioner Kamrunnisha, being the wife/legal heir of late Mati Ullah (original allottee of Quarter no.3, Bunkar Colony, Nati Imli (Labour Colony Chauraha), District Varanasi with the following main prayers:

“(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents No.4 to give possession to petitioner over the locked part of Quarter No.3, Bunkar Colony, Nati Imli, (Labour Colony Chauraha), District-Varanasi, expeditiously.

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.4 to take appropriate decision upon petitioner’s application dated 15.09.2015 (Annexure No.8 to the writ petition) in accordance with law within reasonable time.”

Factual Matrix

3. The factual matrix giving rise to the instant writ petition is delineated herein as under:

4. The facts as culled out from pleading of writ petition are that petitioner’s husband late Mati Ullah was allotted Quarter no.3 Bunkar Colony Nati Imli (Labour Colony Chauraha), District Varanasi by respondents under the State sponsored housing scheme launched for silk weavers. The petitioner’s husband was in possession and was continuously paying rent against the quarter no.3 allotted to him, admeasuring area 25 x 50 square feet. In the meantime, after death of petitioner’s husband, she being widow inherited the possessory rights. However, two persons namely Mohd. Shoeb and Mohd. Juned forcibly grabbed possession over a small portion of Quarter no.3, initially allotted to petitioner’s husband.

5. Petitioner lodged a complaint on 21.09.2013 before the police for removal of the said unauthorised occupants and thereafter, filed two representations dated 26.02.2014 and 05.03.2014 addressed to the District Magistrate, Varanasi.

6. On the representation dated 05.03.2014, filed by petitioner, cognizance was taken by 4^th respondent/Assistant Director, Handloom and Textile Industries, Varanasi Region, Varanasi and notices were issued to Mohd. Shoeb and Mohd. Juned directing them to vacate their unauthorised occupation qua Quarter no.3.

7. Petitioner, thereafter, instituted Writ-C No.27434 of 2014 titled as Kamrunnisha Vs. State of U.P. and 5 others which was disposed of on 19.05.2014 by following below quoted order:

“From the records, it appears that the Assistant Director, Handloom & Textiles, Industries, Varanasi has issued a notice to the fifth and sixth respondents alleging that the aforesaid private respondents are in unauthorized occupation of Quarter No. 3 and calling upon them to vacate the premises failing which appropriate action would be taken in accordance with law.

Since a notice has been issued by the fourth respondent, we direct that the fourth respondent shall act in pursuance of the notice and pass