(1.) The impugned orders dated 17/6/2010, 25/6/2010 and 1/7/2010 passed by learned Single Judge have been assailed by the appellant/Municipal Corporation, Gwalior by filing this Writ Appeal. The contention of learned senior Counsel for the appellant is that Maharaj Bada is the heart of Gwalior city having old monuments having its own value of architectural importance and other historical values which are to be saved. One of the prestigious building in Maharaj Bada, namely, Victoriya Market (also known as Maharani Laxmibai Market, but commonly termed as Victoriya Market even today) caught fire and is now in dilapidated condition. According to learned senior Counsel "Town Hall" in the same locality (Maharaj Bada) of Gwalior city is another prestigious building having its architectural, sculpting and other historical values. One catastrophe occurred in the midnight of 4th and 5th June, 2010 in the prestigious building Victoriya Market fire took place inside the said market and the loss caused to the appellant/Municipal Corporation, Gwalior and Nation was so great that to make it again Rs. twenty crore is to be spent and even then it will not be possible to bring it back to its own glory. On account of said mishap, the officers of the Corporation were shocked and were alarmed that such happening may not be repeated and, hence, a High Power Committee inspected other buildings like Town Hall (basement of which is the subject matter in issue) and other markets with a view to avoid such catastrophe and it was found that the Town Hall is occupied from all sides by shopkeepers under different licenses granted to them and these shops were found underneath the main building of Town Hall and these shops which have been constructed by the licensees are of such a nature that if fire takes place, the whole building of the "Town Hall" will be blasted just like it happened in Victoriya Market. In the basement area of Town Hall the shopkeepers are having their godowns. As per the case of appellant, these godowns are full of fire prone goods like plastic, polythene, deodorants, cosmetics, high pressure perfumes etc. which may catch fire immediately, hence, decision was taken by the appellant/Municipal Corporation to revoke the license of the godown area which is hazardious to the Town Hall building itself. If the godowns are kept outside the building by keeping the arches closed, the problem would not be so grave as any fire can be extinguished from outside. But the building is at higher level and underneath to the main building there are hollow spaces assembled by Mehrab (arch) which can be used by leaning.
(2.) Looking to the seriousness and to keep the prestigious "Town Hall" building intact from any danger including the fire, the licenses of the shopkeepers were revoked vide order dated 12/6/2010 with immediate effect and it was directed to vacate the premises, which was given on license, within 24 hours. Initially the licensees by obeying the action of the appellant revoking their license and directing them to vacate the premises, started vacating the licensed premises, but later on filed Writ Petition before this Court challenging the action of the appellant revoking their licenses vide order dated 12/6/2010 and prayed to quash the said notice by which their licenses were revoked and further prayed that the writ petitioners/respondents 1 to 30 be permanently settled by granting lease to them on the basis of one order which was passed earlier by the Division Bench of this Court on 21/11/2005 in Writ Petition No. 1841/2003. The writ petitioners also prayed an ad-interim writ before the learned Writ Court to stay the operation of the notice Annexure P/8 by which the licenses have been revoked of all the writ petitioners and also prayed that the appellant may be restrained from taking coercive action against the writ petitioners in relation to the building in dispute and not to dispossess them from the shops till final disposal of the petition.
(3.) While hearing the interim relief during vacation as well as after re-opening of the Court after Summer Vacation, three different orders were passed by learned Single Judge which are impugned in this appeal and we think it apposite to quote those three orders.