ORDER 1. RESPONDENTS 1 TO 7 FILED WRIT PETITION NO. 49583 OF 2002 WITH THE H AVERMENT THAT THEY WERE SINGING AND DANCING GIRLS AND NOT PROSTITUTES AND THE APPELLANTS HEREIN, WHO WERE THE RESPONDENTS IN THE WRIT PETITION, WERE UNNECESSARILY HARASSING AND THREATENING TO DISPOSSESS THEM FROM THE PREMISES OCCUPIED BY THEM. A PRAYER WAS MADE TO ISSUE A WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS COMMANDING THE APPELLANTS HEREIN OR THEIR SUBORDINATES AND OTHER OFFICERS NOT TO COMPEL THEM TO VACATE THE PREMISES OCCUPIED BY THEM. EARLIER ALSO, SIMILAR WRIT PETITIONS WERE FILED I.E. WP NO. 4332 OF 1976, WP NO. 8335 OF 1985 AND WP NO. 27141 OF 1997 BY SOME OTHER WRIT PETITIONERS, SIMILARLY SITUATED, SEEKING THE SAME RELIEF. IN THOSE CASES, AN UNDERTAKING WAS GIVEN BY THE COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE STATE OF U.P. THAT THE WRIT PETITIONERS WOULD NOT BE DISPOSSESSED FROM THE PREMISES OCCUPIED BY THEM EXCEPT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 2. IN THE PRESENT CASE WHILE ISSUING A SIMILAR DIRECTION NOT TO HARASS OR DISPOSSESS THE WRIT PETITIONERS (RESPONDENTS HEREIN) EXCEPT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW THE HIGH COURT GAVE AN ADDITIONAL DIRECTION TREATING THE WRIT PETITION IN PUBLIC INTEREST DIRECTING THE STATE TO FRAME A SCHEME FOR REHABILITATION OF THE PROSTITUTES AFTER CONSULTING THE EXPERTS. THE STATE WAS DIRECTED TO SUBMIT THE REPORT TO THE COURT AFTER TWO MONTHS AND THE COURT WAS TO MONITOR THE PROPOSED REHABILITATION SCHEME FRAMED BY THE STATE IN PURSUANCE TO THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED. ADDITIONAL DIRECTION READS: "ALTHOUGH THIS WRIT PETITION IS ALLOWED, WE DIRECT THAT IN ORDER TO MONITOR THE AFORESAID SCHEME AS SUGGESTED BY US, THIS PETITION SHOULD BE AGAIN LISTED BEFORE US AFTER TWO MONTHS ON 7-2-2003 AND BY THAT DATE THE STATE GOVERNMENT SHOULD PREPARE A SCHEME AFTER CONSULTING EXPERTS AND SUBMIT THE SAME BEFORE US SO THAT WE CAN EXAMINE THE SAME AND GIVE APPROPRIATE DIRECTIONS TO ENFORCE THE SCHEME. LET A COPY OF THIS JUDGMENT BE SENT BY THE REGISTRAR GENERAL OF THIS COURT TO THE CHIEF SECRETARY, U.P. AND ALSO TO THE SECRETARIES OF THE DEPARTMENTS OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, LAW, WOMENS WELFARE AND FINANCE, U.P." 3. AGAINST THE ABOVESTATED DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE HIGH COURT, THE STATE OF U.P. HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL SEEKING SETTING ASIDE OF THE AFORESAID ADDITIONAL DIRECTION IN RELATION TO THE SCHEME. AGAINST THE ABOVESTATED DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE HIGH COURT, THE STATE OF U.P. HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL SEEKING SETTING ASIDE OF THE AFORESAID ADDITIONAL DIRECTION IN RELATION TO THE SCHEME. REST OF THE FINDINGS RECORDED BY THE BENCH HAVE NOT BEEN CHALLENGED BEFORE US. 4. COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES HAVE BEEN HEARD. 5. RELIEF REGARDING FRAMING OF SCHEME FOR REHABILITATION OF PROSTITUTES HAD NOT BEEN ASKED FOR IN THE WRIT PETITION. THE CASE OF THE WRIT PETITIONERS WAS THAT THEY WERE SINGING AND DANCING GIRLS AND NOT PROSTITUTES WHEREAS THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE COURT IS TO FRAME A REHABILITATION SCHEME FOR PROSTITUTES IN CONSULTATION WITH THE EXPERTS. THIS DIRECTION HAS BEEN ISSUED UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE RESPONDENT-WRIT PETITIONERS WERE PROSTITUTES WHEREAS ACCORDING TO THEM THEY WERE SINGING AND DANCING GIRLS. 6. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE HIGH COURT TO FRAME A SCHEME FOR REHABILITATION OF THE PROSTITUTES IS UNCALLED FOR IN THE PRESENT CASE. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE COURT TO FRAME A REHABILITATION SCHEME FOR THE PROSTITUTES IS SET ASIDE. DIRECTION ISSUED TO THE APPELLANTS NOT TO HARASS THE RESPONDENTS AND NOT TO DISPOSSESS THEM FROM THE PREMISES OCCUPIED BY THEM EXCEPT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW IS AFFIRMED. 7. THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED ABOVE.