JUDGMENT : Govind Mathur, J. By the order impugned dated 12.7.2016, the learned Single Bench disposed of S.B. Civil Second Stay Petition No.3400/2016 preferred in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1428/2016. By the order aforesaid, the Single Bench stayed effect and operation of order dated 04.2.2016 passed by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Udaipur subject to depositing a sum of Rs.2 Crore by the respondent-petitioner with the Municipal Corporation. 2. The factual matrix necessary to be noticed is that the Municipal Corporation, Udaipur granted approval to the respondent petitioner for construction of residential accommodation on ground floor and further first and second floors at Bharbhuja Ghati, Udaipur. The respondent-petitioner instead of constructing residential houses, constructed 108 shops on ground and further three floors thereon. Certain 'Kacha' constructions by laying down sheds are also made on terrace, which is termed as fourth floor by the respondent-petitioner. Looking to the construction raised contrary to the sanction granted, the Municipal Corporation ordered to seize the entire complex. Prior to it, a notice in this regard was also given on 18.1.2016 and to challenge that a writ petition was filed wherein the order impugned has been passed by the learned Single Bench. 3. It is stated by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Udaipur that the road on which huge Mall (shopping centre having 108 shops) is constructed is only 26 Feet wide. The shops have already been rented out by the respondent-petitioner and the shopping complex established has became a traffic hazard to the entire area. The street is not having sufficient place to accommodate the rush coming to the complex and is also disturbing the parking system on public way. It is asserted that the permission granted by the learned Single Bench to re-open the Mall by depositing a sum of Rs. 2 Crores shall be nothing but perpetuation to traffic chaos on a narrow lane. According to learned counsel, though knowing it well that the permission granted is for residential accommodation, the respondent-petitioner intentionally constructed a market, as such, instant one is a case of conscious violation of law, which demands strict action. The conduct of the respondent-petitioner, as per learned counsel does not deserve any sympathy or equity. 4. According to learned counsel, though knowing it well that the permission granted is for residential accommodation, the respondent-petitioner intentionally constructed a market, as such, instant one is a case of conscious violation of law, which demands strict action. The conduct of the respondent-petitioner, as per learned counsel does not deserve any sympathy or equity. 4. Per contra, as per learned counsels appearing on behalf of the appellant-petitioners the area in which the Mall is constructed is a commercial area and, therefore, construction of 108 shops in the form of Mall is absolutely in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the construction was raised in last three years and during that period no steps were taken by the Municipal Corporation, therefore, the principle of estoppel restrains the Municipal Corporation, Udaipur from taking any action in the matter. Besides that the order under challenge is an interim order based on adequate consideration of facts, hence, does not warrant any interference. Heard learned counsels. 5. True it is the order impugned is an interim order and in normal course this Court restrain itself in interfering in such orders, however, in the instant matter the Mall having 108 shops is situated on a road having width of 26 Feet, in interior part of the old city of Udaipur, which is thickly populated and is prone to huge traffic hazard. The interim order granted, in our opinion, shall certainly create more problem in smooth movement of traffic hence that requires certain modifications. 6. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondent-petitioner submits that the respondent-petitioner shall remove all 'kacha' construction on terrace of the Mall and also get the third floor having 40 shops demolished within a period of 15 days from today. It is further submitted that all necessary care shall also be taken with regard to parking of vehicles including two-wheelers in front of the Mall concerned. 7. Looking to the statement given and considering all relevant facts, we deem it appropriate to modify the interim order dated 12.7.2016 with the following directions :- 1. The respondent-petitioner shall remove all kinds of 'Kacha' as well as 'Pakka' constructions, if any, existing on terrace of the Mall in-question. 2. The respondent-petitioner shall demolish all constructions beyond the second floor of the building in-question within a period of 15 days from today. 3. The respondent-petitioner shall remove all kinds of 'Kacha' as well as 'Pakka' constructions, if any, existing on terrace of the Mall in-question. 2. The respondent-petitioner shall demolish all constructions beyond the second floor of the building in-question within a period of 15 days from today. 3. The respondent-petitioner after demolishing the constructions beyond the second floor shall not raise any kind of 'Kacha'/'Pakka' construction on the terrace of the second floor, however, while removing the construction beyond the second floor, the respondent-petitioner shall take necessary care with regard to the needs of operation and maintenance of the elevator existing. 4. The respondent-petitioner shall also be at liberty to keep required synthetic water-tank on the terrace of second floor. 5. The respondent-petitioner shall also not permit any person including the shop-owners or the customers thereto to park their vehicles on the road and footpath opposite the Mall. All vehicles are required to be parked with the underground parking place, said to be available with the Mall in-question. 6. An affidavit is required to be given by Authorized Representative of the respondent-petitioner about compliance of the above directions before this Court on or before 10.8.2016. 7. The Superintendent of Police, Udaipur shall post at least 02 Constables at Bharbuja Ghati, Udaipur with an assignment to take necessary care of traffic movement during the 08:00 Hrs. to 22:00 Hrs. every day opposite the Mall concerned and the market running through. For the purpose the respondent-petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs. One lac per month with Superintendent of Police, Udaipur on or before 7th day of every month and shall obtain a certificate in this regard, which is further required to be submitted to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Udaipur on or before 15th day of every month. In the event of failure to submit such certificate, the Municipal Corporation, Udaipur shall be at liberty to approach learned Single Bench for vacation of the interim order dated 12.7.2016. The amount aforesaid is required to be utilized by the Rajasthan Police for traffic management in Bharbuja Ghati, Udaipur specially opposite the Mall in-question. 8. The Municipal Corporation, Udaipur shall comply with the order dated 12.7.2016 immediately after demolition of the constructions beyond second floor of the Mall in-question. 9. The amount aforesaid is required to be utilized by the Rajasthan Police for traffic management in Bharbuja Ghati, Udaipur specially opposite the Mall in-question. 8. The Municipal Corporation, Udaipur shall comply with the order dated 12.7.2016 immediately after demolition of the constructions beyond second floor of the Mall in-question. 9. The Municipal Corporation, Udaipur shall provide free entrance to petitioner and the team of its construction workers enabling them to demolish part of the building referred above. The respondent-petitioner shall also remove all debris and rubbles from the market area on day to day basis. 10. The Municipal Corporation, Udaipur shall also file a detailed statement about the steps taken by it against the erring Officers who allowed the respondent-petitioner to raise construction against the sanction granted by the act of commission or omission. 8. The conditions aforesaid are in addition to the interim directions already passed by the learned Single Bench. This order shall be having no effect on merits of writ petition pending before learned Single Bench. 9. With the directions as above, the appeal stands disposed of.