IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.R. No. 102 of 2010. Decided on 6th January, 2011. _____________________________________________________ Vidya Wati and Others. ….Petitioners. -Versus- Gurcharan Singh Puniah and Others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioners. : Mr. Suneet Goel, Advocate. For respondents No. 1 to 6. : Mr. Satyen Vaidya, Advocate. None for respondent No. 7. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Mr. Suneet Goel, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in case the petitioners are permitted to retain the demised premises till the building plans are duly sanctioned, he has instructions not to press this petition. 2. Mr. Satyen Vaidya, learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 6 fairly submits that the petitioners/tenants shall not be evicted till the building plans are duly approved in accordance with law. 3. Consequently, in view discussion/observations made hereinabove, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/landlords not to evict the petitioners till the building plans are duly approved. It is also agreed between the parties that the use and occupation 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - charges will be `500/- per month. This amount shall be paid by the tenants regularly to the landlords. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge January 06, 2011. (bhupender) - 3 - `