MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, SHIMLA Vs. BHANU DUTT SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of both the petitions filed against the order passed by learned Appellate Authority (District Judge, Shimla) under the HP Municipal Corporation Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' in short in an appeal under Section 253 (2) of the Act, whereby learned Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Shimla has been directed to record the statement of Architect Planner on oath who has submitted the report qua unauthorized construction raised by the respondent herein and to afford the opportunity of crossexamination of the Architect Planner and thereafter to record the statement of the respondent as well as the witnesses to be produced by him on oath and allowing their cross-examination on behalf of the Municipal Corporation and to decide the case thereafter afresh. The case has, therefore, been remanded to learned Commissioner.

(2.) Mr. Hamender Chandel, learned Counsel representing the petitioner-Municipal Corporation has relied upon the judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CMPMO No.51 of 2014, titled Municipal Corporation, Shimla through its Commissioner v. Savitri Devi. In that case also, order passed by learned District Judge was under challenge and the issue brought to this Court by Municipal Corporation for adjudication was also similar. This Court after taking note of all pros and cons and also the scope and ambit of Section 253 of the Act as well as the case law touching the principle of natural justice, has arrived at a conclusion that the proceedings under Section 253 of the Act are quasi judicial in nature and it is only the bare minimum requirement of observance of the principle of natural justice should be adhered. The ratio of this judgment reads as follows:

(3.) Similar order passed by learned Appellate Authority, Shimla, was also brought to this Court in CMPMO No.64 of 2014, titled Municipal Corporation, Shimla v. Rattan Sharma. This Court on having taken note of the given facts and circumstances and also the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in A.S. Motors Private Limited v. Union of India and others, 2013 10 SCC 114, has held as follows: