Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, J.:- The matter has been placed at the residence of one of us (Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.) by the Registry on the direction of the Senior Vacation Judge. 2. Heard Mr. S.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Mahesh Chandra, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 & 5 and Mr. Manjiv Shukla, learned Standing counsel for the opposite party nos. 2, 3 & 4. 3. Mr. S.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the alleged compliance of the High Court's order dated 21.12.2011 passed in Writ Petition No. 8042 (MB) of 2011, the members of the petitioner's Society are being evicted from the plot in question in most arbitrary and illegal manner without adopting any due procedure as provided under the law. 4. Mr. Mahesh Chandra, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 1 & 5 on the other hand submitted that, in fact, the number of writ petition mentioned in the impugned order dated 23.12.2011 has been wrongly numbered. The correct number of the Writ Petition is 8042 (MB) of 2008. He has also shown the copy of the order dated 21.12.2011 passed in Writ Petition No. 8042 (MB) of 2008 as well as letter dated 16.12.2011 of the District Magistrate, Lucknow, the same are taken on record. Mr. Mahesh Chandra submitted that this Court vide order dated 21.12.2011 has provided as under: "Housing Commissioner prays that the matter may be taken after six weeks and in the meantime necessary steps would be taken so that the petitioner gets possession of the property in question. Considering the scheme aforesaid, the District Magistrate would be better advised to hold a camp on the spot so that persons who are residing over the land in question and intend to have the alternative accommodation, can easily approach him." 5. His further submissions is that on the basis of instructions received from MR. Dinesh Kumar, Executive Engineer, a camp of District Magistrate, Lucknow is proposed to be held on the spot on 30th of December, 2011 for the purpose of identifying the residents on the plot in question. Thereafter as per the scheme, the persons identified are to be rehabilitated, who are found eligible. He strongly disputes that 500 families are residing on the plot in question. Thereafter as per the scheme, the persons identified are to be rehabilitated, who are found eligible. He strongly disputes that 500 families are residing on the plot in question. As per the instructions in the earlier survey there were only 68 families, which as per the letter dated 16.12.2011 of the District Magistrate are 71 (out of which 8 families have left and 14 families are from Assam/Bangladesh, whose nationality could not be verified). 6. List this case along with Writ Petition No. 8042 (MB) of 2008 on the reopening of the Court on 2nd of January, 2012. 7. Meanwhile, the District Magistrate, Lucknow shall hold a camp on the spot so that the persons who are residing over the plot in question are identified and who intend to have the alternative accommodation, can easily approach him for the purpose of rehabilitation. 8. Till the exercise as per the order dated 21.12.2011 is complete, the eviction should not be given effect to.