DHARAM PAL Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two writ petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment since identical questions of law and fact are involved in the same.

(2.) To appreciate the dispute raised in these petitions, it would be pertinent to mention that one Sh.Brijender Singh Parmar had filed a writ petition in this Court praying that the construction raised by respondents No.4&5 in the said writ petition be declared to be illegal since the same had been raised without any permission from the municipal authorities. On 24.6.2009 this Court passed the following directions in the aforesaid case:

(3.) This Court in the said petition found that the Municipal Council was not performing its duties and was trying to protect illegal constructions raised by many persons in total violation of the law. Finally, this Court had appointed Sh.B.R. Kaundal as Commissioner to demarcate 57 cases of encroachments made by different persons. He in his report informed this Court that only 51 cases were marked to him since in six other cases it was alleged that the persons had vacated the encroachments on municipal/Government land. He further found that case No.40 is also found repeated at Sr.No.50. In two cases the encroachers vacated the encroachments during the process of demarcation. Therefore, he submitted his demarcation report in respect of 47 cases.