Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1010 (HP)

NEELAM SHARMA v. STATE OF H. P.

2013-12-09

KULDIP SINGH, MANSOOR AHMAD MIR

body2013
JUDGEMENT MANSOOR AHMAD J. - 1. THIS Public Interest Litigation petition was filed in this court and came up for consideration on 12.5.2006. On that date, respondents were directed to file reply. After filing reply, petitioner has also filed the rejoinder. 2. AFTER examining the entire controversy, the Division Bench of this Court made specific directions vide order dated 3rd May, 2007, whereby and whereunder the Municipal Corporation was directed to take steps to do the needful in terms of the said order. This petition remained on Board for the last 7 years. The main dispute in this Public Interest Litigation Petition is to draw legal action against those encroachers who have made unauthorized construction in breach of the Rules occupying the field or in violation of the sanctioned plan granted by the Competent Authority. 3. RESPONDENT No. 3 has filed affidavit on 26.11.2013. It is apt to reproduce paras 1 and 2 of the same: "1.That as on the last date of hearing, i.e., on 29.10.2013, as per the record of the Municipal Corporation, Shimla, 30 cases of unauthorized construction in the Bazar Area comprising of Lower Bazar, Middle Bazar, Anaj Mandi, Lakkar Bazar, Anaj Mandi, Ram Bazar, Lakkar Bazar were pending in the Court of replying respondent under various provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1994. Out of these 30 cases, five cases have been disposed of by the answering respondent and five cases have been fixed for final hearing on 30.11.2013. The remaining cases are being heard on a weekly basis and sincere efforts would be made to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible. 2. That in addition to above the replying respondent had also reported compliance before this Hon'ble Court with respect to the eviction orders passed in 14 cases of encroachment on public property. In this regard, it is submitted that out of 14 cases, the respondent Corporation has demolished/ removed 4 unauthorized structure/ encroachment and for removal of the remaining structure/encroachment, the process is going on and the same shall be removed immediately after confirmation of their antecedents and demarcation measurements which will be required in each case with the assistance of Revenue Department". 4. IN the given circumstances, the Municipal Corporation has to take steps to pass appropriate eviction orders in the said cases, while keeping in view the order dated 29.10.2013. 4. IN the given circumstances, the Municipal Corporation has to take steps to pass appropriate eviction orders in the said cases, while keeping in view the order dated 29.10.2013. Viewed thus, we deem it proper to command respondent No. 3 to pass orders in all the cases in terms of paras 1 and 2 quoted (supra) and report compliance before the Additional Registrar (Judicial). Any deviation shall be viewed seriously. In default, the Additional Registrar (Judicial) shall bring it to the notice of this Court for drawing contempt proceedings against respondent No. 3. 5. THE Registry is directed to furnish copy of this order to the petitioner and also to counsel for respondent No. 3 dasti. 6. THE petition stands disposed of along with pending applications, if any.