Wednesday, 17, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Cooperative Housing vs The State Of
2022 Latest Caselaw 4028 HP

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 4028 HP
Judgement Date : 1 June, 2022

Himachal Pradesh High Court
Cooperative Housing vs The State Of on 1 June, 2022
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
                                                       .
       IN   THE    HIGH   COURT OF HIMACHAL             PRADESH,





                             SHIMLA

                   ON THE 1st DAY OF JUNE, 2022





                              BEFORE
               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL

                CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.1716 of 2018

    Between:

    HIMACHAL
    SECRETARIAT
                   rPRADESH
                  EMPLOYEES


    COOPERATIVE      HOUSING
    SOCIETY,  BASANT   VIHAR
    KUSUMPTI,      SHIMLA­09
    THROUGH ITS SECRETARY.


                                                     ....PETITIONER.

    (BY. MR. ONKAR JAIRATH, ADVOCATE)




    AND





    1.      THE STATE OF
    HIMACHAL       PRADESH





    THROUGH      ADDITIONAL
    CHIEF SECRETARY (URBAN
    DEVELOPMENT)   TO   THE
    GOVERNMENT           OF
    HIMACHAL PRADESH.
    2.    THE   STATE    OF
    HIMACHAL       PRADESH
    THROUGH      ADDITIONAL
    CHIEF        SECRETARY
    (REVENUE)    TO     THE
    GOVERNMENT           OF
    HIMACHAL PRADESH.




                                      ::: Downloaded on - 01/06/2022 20:06:26 :::CIS
                                        2




                                                               .
    3.     THE              DEPUTY





    COMMISSIONER,           SHIMLA,
    AT SHIMLA­01.





    4.   THE      MUNICIPAL
    CORPORATION,    SHIMLA
    THROUGH             ITS
    COMMISSIONER.
    5. THE TOWN AND COUNTRY




    PLANNING    DEPARTMENT
    THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR.
                                                         ....RESPONDENTS.


    (BY. MR. DINESH THAKUR, MR. SUMESH RAJ, ADDITIONAL
    ADVOCATE GENERALS, WITH MR. MANOJ BAGGA,
    ASSISTANT ADVOCATE GENERAL, FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1
    TO 3 AND 5.


    MR.  NARESH    KUMAR               GUPTA,        ADVOCATE,              FOR
    RESPONDENT NO.4)




    Whether approved for reporting?1 No

           This petition coming on for admission this day, the Court passed the





    following:





                 JUDGMENT

By way of this Writ Petition, the petitioner has prayed

for the following relief:­

"I) That the Respondents may be directed to remove the

un­authorized construction (as detailed in Annexure P­2)

.

raised in Jiwanoo Colony, Moihan Shiv­Nagar, Shimla,

(H.P.)"

2. During the course of hearing, the attention of the Court

has been drawn to the averments contained in Para­4 of the reply

filed by respondent No.4 to the Writ Petition, which reads as under:­

"4.

                extent
                   r      that

That the contents of this para are denied to the the replying respondent is discharge of their official duties as alleged. It is remiss in

submitted that in view of the complaint submitted by the petitioner society the site inspection was conducted by the Committee comprising of Additional District

Magistrate (L&O) Shimla, Architect Planner, M C Shimla, Town Planner, T& CP Department, Naib Tehsildar Shimla

(Rural) and Naib Tehsildar Settlement Shimla prepared detailed report of the violations at the site. Violations on

the part of about 58 persons of Jiwanu Colony were found at the spot. After certifying the facts notices under

the provisions of H.P. Municipal Corporation Act 1994 were issued to all the aforesaid 58 violators on 26.4.2022 and the proceedings have been initiated against all those violators as per the provisions of H.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 and the same shall be taken to its logical conclusion after affording due opportunity of being heard to the parties and the petitioners Society may wait outcome of the same."

.

3. In view of the stand taken by respondent No.4, this Writ

Petition is disposed of with the direction that the action which

stands initiated by the respondent­Corporation, details whereof are

mentioned in Para­4 of the reply filed by respondent No.4, be taken

to its logical conclusion as expeditiously as possible, preferably

4.

r to within a period of four months from today, but by adhering to the

principles of natural justice.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand

disposed of.

(Ajay Mohan Goel)

Judge June 01, 2022 (Rishi)

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter