ORDER 1. By this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 5.12.2024 [Annexure P/1] passed by the Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Parishad, Thandla, District Jhabua whereby they have been directed to remove their construction (encroachment) within a period of five days stating that else the same would be removed in exercise of power under the provisions of M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent as well as intervenor have raised an objection as regards maintainability of the petition on the ground of availability of alternate remedy to the petitioners to challenge the impugned order by preferring an appeal under section 308 of the Act, 1961 before the Collector. As per section 308 any person aggrieved by any notice or order or other action taken by the Chief Municipal Officer may prefer appeal to the Collector against such order. Such appeal may intra alia be preferred against the order passed under section 187 of the Act also. Section 308 of the Municipalities Act, 1961 reads as under: "308. As per section 308 any person aggrieved by any notice or order or other action taken by the Chief Municipal Officer may prefer appeal to the Collector against such order. Such appeal may intra alia be preferred against the order passed under section 187 of the Act also. Section 308 of the Municipalities Act, 1961 reads as under: "308. Appeals against orders of Council, President and Chief Municipal Officer in [Nagar Panchayat]:- (1)In the case of [Nagar Panchayat] any person aggrieved by :- (a) any notice or order issued or other action taken by the Council under sections 193, 197, 219 and 231 or under any rules or bye-laws made for the purposes of the said sections and any order made appealable by such rules or bye-laws; (b) any notice or order or other action taken by the President under sections 183 (5) (a) and (b), 184, 187, 190, 203, 205, 206, 207, 209, 210, 211, 212, 218, 229, 268 and 283 or under any rules or bye-laws made for the purposes of the said sections and any order made appealable by such rules or byelaws; (c) any notice or order or other action taken by the Chief Municipal Officer under sections 180 (1) and (2), 185, 191, 192, 194, 208, 220, 221, 223, 227, 242 251 and 285 or under any rules or bye-laws made for the purposes of the said sections and any order made appealable by such rules or bye-laws; (d) any order of the Council, President or the Chief Municipal Officer, as the case may be, granting or refusing to grant a licence or permission; may appeal to the Collector within thirty days from the date of such order and such appeal shall be heard and disposed of by the Collector in the prescribed manner. (2)The Collector may, for sufficient reasons to be recorded in writing admit any appeal after the expiry of the period specified in sub-section (1). (3)The Collector may remand, any case for further enquiry or decision or may pass other order that may be deemed just and proper and no appeal or revision shall lie against this decision :Provided that no order shall be passed to the prejudice of any person until he has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (3)The Collector may remand, any case for further enquiry or decision or may pass other order that may be deemed just and proper and no appeal or revision shall lie against this decision :Provided that no order shall be passed to the prejudice of any person until he has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (4)The Collector may allow an Executive Officer or any other official deputed by the Council for the purpose to appear before him in any appeal and to watch or represent interest of the Council." 4. Though in the impugned order the provision under which the same has been passed has not been mentioned but from perusal of the same it is evident that the same has been passed under section 187 of the Act, 1961 since the allegation levelled therein is as regards construction having been made by the petitioner without obtaining permission. Though in the impugned order the provision under which the same has been passed has not been mentioned but from perusal of the same it is evident that the same has been passed under section 187 of the Act, 1961 since the allegation levelled therein is as regards construction having been made by the petitioner without obtaining permission. For ready reference the said order [Annexure P/1] as under: ^^Øekad@u-i-@2024@2004 FkkUnyk] fnukad 5-12-2024 çfr] Jh vfer firk 'k'khdkUr tSu FkkUnyk ftyk >kcqvk ¼e-ç-½ fo"k; & fcuk vuqefr d¢ O;klkf;d dkEiysDl fuekZ.k d¢ lacaèk esaA lanÒZ & 1- dk;kZy;hu i= Øekad@u-i-@2024@168 fnukad 30-1-2024 2- dk;kZy;hu i= Øekad@u-i-@2024@404 fnukad 28-3-2024 3- dk;kZy;hu i= Øekad@u-i-@2024@459 fnukad 12-4-2024 4- dk;kZy;hu i= Øekad@u-i-@2024@595 fnukad 17-5-2024 5- dk;kZy;hu i= Øekad@u-i-@2024@1664 fnukad 23-10-2024 6- dk;kZy;hu i= Øekad@u-i-@2024@1715 fnukad 5-11-2024 mij¨ä fo"k;kUrxZr ,oa lUnfÒZr i=¨a d¢ rkjrE; esa vkid¨ lwfpr fd;k tkrk gS fd vkid¢ }kjk FkkUnyk uxj d¢ okMZ Øekad 01 esa FkkUnyk fyeM+h ck;ikl j¨M ij fLFkr losZ ua- 335 o 335@1 Òwfe ij O;kolkf;d dkEiysDl dk fuekZ.k fudk; ls vuqefr fy, fcuk fuekZ.k djok;k x;k gSA mä dkEiysDl fuekZ.k dk;Z dh vkV¨esfVd fcfYMax Iyku vuqoy flVe ABPAS-II d¢ ekè;e ls fofèkor vuqefr çkIr djus gsrq lUnfÒZr i=¨a d¢ ekè;e ls vkid¨ dà ckj lwfpr fd;k tk pqdk gSA ckotwn mld¢ vkid¢ }kjk orZeku rd vuqefr çkIr djus gsrq fofèkor~ vkosnu çLrqr ugÈ fd;k x;k gS ,oa fuekZ.k dk;Z iw.kZ dj fy;k x;k gS t¨ fd [ksn dk fo"k; gSA vkidk mä ÑR; uxjikfydk vfèkfu;e 1961 ,oa eè;çns'k Òwfe fodkl fu;e 2012 d¢ çkoèkku¨a d¢ fo#) g¨dj n.Muh; vijkèk dh Js.kh esa vkrk gSA vr% vkid¢ }kjk fd;k x;k voSèk fuekZ.k ¼vfrØe.k½ 05 fnol esa Lo;a gVk dj fudk; d¨ lwfpr djuk lqfuf'pr djsaA vU;Fkk fudk; veys }kjk fnukad 12-12-2024 ¼xq#okj½ d¨ çkr% 11-30 cts ls mä voSèk fuekZ.k ¼vfrØe.k½ d¨ l[rh ls gVk;k tkosxkA ftlesa g¨us okyh O;; jkf'k Òh vkils olwy dh tkosxhA lwfpr g¨aA eq[; uxj ikfydk vfèkdkjh uxj ifj"kn ftyk >kcqvk 5. Section 187 of the Act, 1961 is also in respect of construction of a building without obtaining permission. The relevant part of the same is as under: "187. Notice of new buildings. - (1) No person shall erect or re-erect or construct or build or commerce to erect or re-erect or construct or build any building without the sanction of the Council. The relevant part of the same is as under: "187. Notice of new buildings. - (1) No person shall erect or re-erect or construct or build or commerce to erect or re-erect or construct or build any building without the sanction of the Council. (2) Before beginning to erect any building, or to alter externally or add to any existing building, or to construct or reconstruct any projecting portion of a building in respect of which the Council is empowered by section 184, to enforce a removal or set-back, the person intending so to build, alter, add or reconstruct shall give to the Council notice thereof, in writing and shall, of required by a bye-law or by special order to do so furnish along with such notice a plan showing the levels, at which the foundation and lowest floor of such building are proposed to be laid, by reference to some level known to the Council and all such information as may be required regarding the limits, design, ventilation and materials of the proposed building, and the intended situation and construction of the drains, sewers, privies, waterclosers and cesspools, if any, to be used in connection therewith and the location of the building with reference to any existing or projected streets and the purpose for which the building will be used. x x x x x (8) Whoever begins any construction, alteration, addition or reconstruction without obtaining permission or giving the notice required by sub-section (2) or without furnishing the documents or affording information above prescribed, in any manner contrary to such orders of the Council as may be issued under this section or contrary to the provisions of sub-section (7), or in any other respect contrary to the provisions of this Act or any bye-laws in force thereunder, shall be punished with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees for each day during which such contravention continues after conviction for the first such contravention. Provided that the Chief Municipal Officer may, without prejudice to his right to take proceedings for line in respect of the contravention, require the owner by written notice:- (a) either to pull down or remove the work or if he so elects to effect such alteration therein as may be necessary to make it in conformity with the requirement as shown in the notice; or (b) who is erecting such building or executing such work or has erected such building or executed such work on or before such day as shall be specified in such notice, by a statement in writing subscribed by him or by an agent duly authorised by him in that behalf and addressed to the Chief Municipal Officer, to show sufficient cause why such building or work shall not be removed, altered or pulled down; or (c) on such day and at such time and place as shall be specified in such notice to attend personally or by an agent duly authorised by him in that behalf, and show sufficient cause why such building or work shall not be removed, altered or pulled down. If such person fails to show sufficient cause, to the satisfaction of the Chief Municipal Officer, why such building or work shall not be removed, altered or pulled down, the Chief Municipal Officer may remove, alter or pull down the building or work and the expenses thereof shall be paid by the persons." 6. The impugned order has been passed by the respondents in respect of violation of section 187 of the Act, 1961 hence is an order appealable under Section 308 of the Act. Thus, the petitioners evidently have an alternate remedy of preferring an appeal before the Collector against the same but they have not availed the said remedy and have straight away approached the Court. 7. In view of availability of alternate remedy to the petitioners as aforesaid, I do not deem it to be a fit case to entertain this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition is hence dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail the alternate remedy available to them. 7. In view of availability of alternate remedy to the petitioners as aforesaid, I do not deem it to be a fit case to entertain this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petition is hence dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail the alternate remedy available to them. In case the appeal is preferred by the petitioners within a period of three weeks from today along with an application for stay then till decision of the stay application the interim order dated 10.12.2024 passed in this petition shall remain in operation.