The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad has allowed a writ petition filed by a weaver’s widow, commanding the State authorities to restore possession of a portion of a residential quarter and execute a transfer deed in her favor. The Division Bench of Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Indrajeet Shukla observed that in a family of weavers, the art is hereditary and the death of the head of the family cannot be a ground to displace the members from the colony.
Background
The petitioner, Kamrunnisha, is the widow of late Mati Ullah, who was the original allottee of Quarter No. 3, Bunkar Colony, Nati Imli, District Varanasi. The quarter was allotted under a State-sponsored housing scheme for silk weavers. Following the death of her husband, the petitioner inherited the possessory rights.
The dispute arose when two individuals, Mohd. Shoeb and Mohd. Juned, allegedly grabbed a portion of the quarter. Although the Assistant Director, Handloom and Textile Industries, Varanasi, eventually evicted the unauthorized occupants in April 2015 and sealed the premises, the authorities refused to hand over the recovered portion to the petitioner, claiming they lacked the original allotment records.
Arguments of the Parties
Counsel for the Petitioner: The petitioner’s counsel argued that the respondents had already admitted the allotment in favor of the petitioner’s husband through previous orders dated April 11, 2014, and October 18, 2014. It was contended that once the unauthorized occupants were evicted based on the petitioner’s complaint, there was no legal justification for the State to withhold possession of the recovered portion.
Counsel for the State-Respondents: The Standing Counsel for the State contended that while a 1996 committee list identified Mati Ullah as an occupant, the actual allotment records were unavailable in the office. Furthermore, the State alleged that the petitioner had constructed unauthorized shops on government land adjacent to the quarter and was realizing rent from them, thus being guilty of encroachment.
Court’s Analysis
The Court noted that the State’s current stand—disputing the allotment due to missing records—contradicted its own previous judicial and administrative findings. The Bench highlighted that the Assistant Director had explicitly concluded on October 18, 2014, that the quarter was originally allotted to late Mati Ullah and that the other parties were trespassers.
The Court drew an adverse inference against the State because it failed to produce the allotment list of the colony despite a specific court order dated March 9, 2026.
On the social and cultural significance of the weaving community, the Court observed:
“In a family of weavers in India, all members do weaving and the weaving is a hereditary art that passed on to the next generation. We cannot permit death of this art by displacing the members of the family of a weavers from the colony upon the death of head of the family.”
The Court further held:
“Once the Government had itself decided to transfer quarters to the occupant-weavers in possession, the death of a husband-weaver cannot be a ground to deny same rights to weaver’s widow.”
Decision
The High Court quashed the contested actions and issued a writ of mandamus commanding the Assistant Director, Handloom & Textiles Industries, Varanasi Region, to restore possession of the locked part of Quarter No. 3 to Kamrunnisha forthwith. The Court also ordered that the transfer deed be executed in her name as the successor of late Mati Ullah.
Case Details:
- Case Title: Kamrunnisha v. State of U.P. and 3 others
- Case No.: WRIT-C No. 37114 of 2023
- Bench: Justice Ajit Kumar and Justice Indrajeet Shukla
- Date: April 16, 2026
