VIJAY SHARMA Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner through the medium of instant petition is seeking quashment of order dated 23.02.2012 passed by respondent No.2 whereby seeking impleadment of the petitioner as party respondent in the appeal filed by Lt. Col. G.C.Raina V. Municipal Corporation, Jammu is rejected as well as order dated 09.07.2010 passed by respondent no.2.

(2.) It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that by virtue of a Sale Deed dated 31.12.2003, the petitioner purchased a Flat No.3 situated at First Floor in Roop Mani Enclave, Patel Nagar, Jammu from respondents 5 and 6 for residential purpose. It is also contended that after selling said flat, the respondents 5 and 6 converted whole of the building for commercial purpose and inducted so many business concerns in the said building. The petitioner was facing hardship for parking facility in the basement of the building because said basement was actually kept for utilizing parking space by the occupants of the Flats. The petitioner lodged a complaint before the municipal authority raising objection for converting the said building from residential to commercial one. Upon receiving the said complaint, municipal authority issued a Notice under Section 7(1) of the J&K Control of Building Operation Act whereby directed the respondents 5 and 6 herein to show cause within a period of 48 days from the date of service of notice as to why the khilafwarzi as detailed in the notice, should not be demolished. The respondents 5 and 6 failed to remove the khilafwarzi within the period prescribed, accordingly, a notice for demolition was issued to the respondents 5 and 6. Being aggrieved, the respondents 5 and 6 questioned the said order of demolition before the appellate authority, i.e., respondent No.2 herein, who vide its order dated 04.03.2010 stayed the operation of the demolition order and directed to maintain status quo.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that on coming to know about the filing of the appeal having been filed by respondents 5 and 6, the petitioner filed an application for impleadment of the petitioner as party respondent on the ground that the proceedings for demolition have been commenced at the instance of the petitioner, as such, the petitioner was a necessary party. The application filed by the petitioner herein came to be disposed of vide order dated 23.02.2012 thereby rejecting the prayer of the petitioner by observing that her right of parking and inconvenience shall be caused and other easementary rights shall be affected in using of Flat in the appellant converts residential premises into commercial one and further observed that for that purpose learned Tribunal was of considered opinion that applicant (petitioner herein) can acquire these rights by approaching the Civil Court. Against this order of the learned Tribunal, instant petition has been filed by the petitioner on various grounds.