KANWARJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a public interest litigation in which the Petitioners seek for a direction by issuance of writ of mandamus for removing the entire illegal construction raised by the Power Development Department Authorities by enforcing the order dated 17-04-2008 of Respondent No. 6, namely, Housing Board with a further direction to restore the public park to its original status. The Petitioners also seek for a direction to the State Government to allow the said park to be used for the purpose as envisaged in the layout plan in accordance with the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Petitioners further seek for issuance of a writ of prohibition to restrain the PDD Authorities from adopting any revengeful attitude towards the residents of the said area or creating any hindrance with regard to the use of the electricity.

(2.) Brief facts which are required to be stated are that the Petitioners are the residents of Shastri Nagar, Jammu, that Power Development Department Authorities illegally encroached into the park shown in the lay out plan and started raising construction and thereby creating hindrance to the residents of the locality, that the Power Development Department Authorities under the behest of Respondents 2 to 4 encroached into part of the land of the park by locating two transformers in it and that Pacca construction was also made for running their regular office. It is stated that at the instance of the residents of Shastri Nagar, Respondents 5 and 6 initiated action against the officials of Respondents 2 to 4 and that in pursuance of such steps taken, an order came to be issued on 17-04-2008 for demolition of the unauthorized construction put up by the Respondents 2 to 4. However, it is stated that the Power Development Department Authorities continued to remain in the premises of the park and thereby causing grave prejudice to the residents of Shastri Nagar. It is with the above stated allegations, the Petitioners have come forward with this writ petition seeking for the directions as stated above.

(3.) After issuance of notice, initially opportunities were extended to the Respondents to file their respective statements,. Thereafter, on 16-12-2010 an order came to be passed by this Court in the presence of Respondents 2 to 4. It is stated in the order that the room constructed inside the park, which was being used for the purpose of collecting revenue be removed and six weeks time was granted for the said purpose. Unfortunately, instead of complying with the said directions, Respondents 2 to 4 have placed an affidavit before this Court where it was sought to be contended that the Housing Board themselves are inclined to allow that part of land in which the construction now stands in favour of Power Development Department in order to maintain the power supply uninterruptedly by maintenance of 630 KVA transformer which was installed in the said premises of the park.