YASHPAL BANSAL Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, petitioners have prayed for the following relief:-

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case.

(3.) It is not in dispute that the land through which the reconstruction of public path is being sought by the petitioners is public land. Learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation, Shimla submits that the Corporation has no objection as far as the development of this particular public path is concerned, however, it is but for the hindrance which is being created by private respondents that the work remains incomplete. He has drawn the attention of the Court to the reply filed on behalf of respondent No.1 dtd. 10/11/2010, in para 7 whereof it stands mentioned that though the work to repair/maintain the said path was awarded to a contractor, but the same could not be executed by the contractor due to the dispute with regard to the status of the land in question. A perusal of the reply filed by respondents No. 3 to 6 demonstrates that it is not their case that the path is sought to be reconstructed/mettled from the land owned by them. Their objection to the reconstruction/mettling of the path is that the same should not be done as the path is being used by the residents of the area for taking their cattle to their fields etc. As per said respondents during rainy and snow season, there is every likelihood of slipping of cattle in case the path is reconstructed/mettled.