Arun Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others

Sandeep Sharma, J

By way of present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for following substantive reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities to make allotment of the newly constructed shop in question in terms of Annexure P-6 i.e. order dated 2.7.2007 passed in CWP No. 505 of 2002 and Annexure P-7 affidavit dated 11.6.2007.

(ii) If during the pendency of the present writ petition the respondent authorities take steps to make allotment of the newly constructed shop in question in ways and means other than the terms of Annexure P-6 i.e. order dated 2.7.2007 passed in CWP No. 505 of 2002 and Annexure P-7 affidavit dated 11.6.2007 than direct the respondent authorities to place the same on record and issue a writ of certiorari to quash the same."

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record, especially order dated 2.7.2007 passed by this Court in CWP No.505 of 2002, Annexure P-6, as well as affidavit dated 11.6.2007 sworn in by Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Nalagarh District Solan, H.P., this Court finds that dispute inter se parties is/was with regard to allotment of newly constructed shops constructed by Council after demolishing the existing structure standing on Plot No.7, as such prior to filing of the petition at hand, petitioner had approached this Court by way of CWP No.505 of 2002, wherein Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Nalagarh filed an affidavit stating therein that Municipal Council by way of resolution has decided to construct new shops in place of shops in dispute, which are in dilapidated condition and petitioner as well as respondent No.4 would be given preference during allotment.

Pursuant to filing of aforesaid affidavit, earlier writ petition No. 505 of 2002 came to be disposed of vide order dated 2.7.2007, wherein Court having taken note of aforesaid affidavit filed by Executive Officer, Municipal Council disposed of the petition as having rendered infructuous with the observation that parties will always remain bound by the contents of affidavit dated 11.6.2007.

In the aforesaid background, grouse of the petitioner, at this stage, is that though after passing of aforesaid order, Municipal Council, Nalagarh has constructed shops on Plot No.7, but they are not being given preference in the allotment of the shops in question.

Mr. Dinesh Bhanot, learned counsel representing Municipal Council, Nalagarh, on instructions, states that Municipal Council is bound by its undertaking furnished in this regard by way of affidavit dated 11.6.2007 and as such, as and and when shops are allotted, petitioner and respondent No.4 would be given preference.

This Court finds that even on 7.3.2017 while considering the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for interim stay, this Court recorded the statement of Mr. Dinesh Bhanot counsel for respondent No.3, that at the time of allotment, preference will be given to petitioner and respondent No.4, as per affidavit dated 11.6.2007.

Consequently, in view of aforesaid fair stand taken by counsel representing Municipal Council, Nalagarh as well as undertaking furnished before this Court vide affidavit dated 11.6.2007, this Court sees no reason to keep the present petition alive, accordingly the same is disposed of with the direction to Municipal Council, Nalagarh to give preference to petitioner and respondent No.4 at the time of allotment of shops in question. Since, shops stand constructed, this Court hopes and trusts that necessary action towards allotment shall be taken expeditiously, preferably within a period of four weeks from today.

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, so also pending applications, if any.