IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP Nos. 249 and 210 of 2010. Decided on: 29.6.2010. 1.CWP No.249 of 2010 Anup Kumar and others Petitioners. Versus State of H.P. & others. Respondents. 2.CWP No.210 of 2010 Rajni kant. Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & others. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. For the petitioner(s) : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass , Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. K.D. Sood, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral): These Writ petitions have been filed with the following prayer(s): 1.CWP No.249 of 2010 (i) That a writ of certiorari may kindly be issued and the impugned notice dated 7.1.10 annexure P-2 may kindly be declared illegal null and void and same may be quashed and set aside. (ii) That respondent state may kindly be directed to ask the respondents 3 to 5 to construct the shopping complex at the earliest and in first phase and then develop the park. 2 (iii) that respondents be restrained from demolishing the shop of the petitioners and taking the possession of the shops till the new shops are made available to the petitioner just for construction of park. 2.CWP No.210 of 2010 (i) That a writ of certiorari may kindly be issued and the impugned notice dated 7.1.10 annexure P-2 may kindly be declared illegal null and void and same may be quashed and set aside. (ii) That respondent state may kindly be directed to ask the respondents 3 to 5 to construct the shopping complex at the earliest and in first phase and then develop the park. (iii) That respondents be restrained from demolishing the shop of the petitioners and taking the possession of the shops till the new shop is made available to the petitioner just for construction of park. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Advocate General have submitted that the property of the petitioner(s) have been duly acquired and the petitioner(s) have received compensation. It is also submitted that the petitioner(s) have been offered shops in the proposed shopping complex in terms of the orders passed by this Court. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner(s) is that other encroachers have been given assurance for a room in the shopping complex and they have been permitted to continue their shops near the pond. It is submitted that the petitioner(s) are not the encroachers and they are also entitled for similar treatment. These submissions are seriously disputed by the learned Addl. Advocate General. Mr. K.D. Sood, learned counsel for third respondent submits that the construction project could not be undertaken without demolishing the shops of the petitioner(s). Be that as it may, petitioners cannot be allowed to be in possession of the property in view of the fact that acquisition proceedings have already been completed. The question is solely with regard to the arrangement for accommodating the petitioner(s). 3 The petitioner(s) may file an appropriate representation before first respondent. The learned Addl. Advocate General has submitted that the petitioner(s) had already been given offer for alternate accommodation on appropriate rent but it is the petitioner(s) who have refused to occupy the same. The petitioner(s) will hand over vacant possession of the premises on or before 15.7.2010. In case the petitioner(s) do not surrender the vacant possession of the premises, it will be open to the respondents to forcibly evict the petitioner(s) and take possession and demolish the building. As far as the interim arrangement is concerned the petitioner(s) may make a representation before first respondent within one week from today in which case the first respondent will consider the same and take appropriate action in accordance with law and justice without discriminating the petitioner(s), within another one week. ( Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. ( Kuldip Singh), Judge. June 29, 2010 (sks/grs)