Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Ravi Narchal vs . The State Of Rajasthan & Ors. on 5 August, 2015
Author: Sunil Ambwani
Bench: Sunil Ambwani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
O R D E R
D.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION(PIL) NO.883/2015
RAVI NARCHAL Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.
DATE:05.08.2015
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SUNIL AMBWANI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT SINGH
Mr. Ravi Narchal, petitioner, present in person.
Mr. N.M. Lodha, Advocate General assisted by
Mr. Vishal Sharma,
Mr. Sheetanshu Sharma,
Mr. M.M. Ranjan, Senior Counsel assisted by
Mr. H.S. Khandelwal &
Mr. Daulat Sharma, for the respondents.
Mr. Dileep Sharma, for respondent-Shri Mahesh Tejwani Mr. Shashikant Sharma, Deputy Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, present in person.
Mr. Prakash Dudi, Revenue Officer,Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, present in person.
***** REPORTABLE
1. We have heard Shri Ravi Narchal, petitioner, appearing in person, learned Advocate General of the State of Rajasthan, and learned counsels appearing for the respondents, intervenors and applicants interested in the matter.
2. This writ petition was registered, in public interest, on a letter received by the Court on 13.01.2015, complaining of large scale unauthorized constructions including multi-storied buildings, in which hotels are running on the land allotted for petrol pumps; illegally changing the land use; illegal constructions, and encroachments in the 'Ana Sagar Lake'; defacing the City of Ajmer, which is a heritage City, recently declared to be 'Smart City' by the Central Government.
3. On 21.01.2015, we had passed the following order:-
This writ petition, in public interest, has been entertained on a letter petition filed by Shri Ravi Narchal, A-31, Chandervardi Nagar, Ajmer, complaining the constructions of a multi-storied building to be used as a hotel building on the land allotted for petrol pump by illegally changing the use of the land by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ajmer. It is alleged that the hotel has been constructed by Shri Mahesh Tejwani, Lohagal Road, Ajmer in violation of the Municipal Rules. The petitioner has also annexed the newspaper reports alleging large scale unauthorised constructions in the city of Ajmer, which is a heritage city, and has been recently declared Smart City by the Government of India amongst the four to be developed from international funding.
Issue notice to the Chief Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, Additional Chief Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Commissioner, Ajmer and Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ajmer to reply to the allegations made in the letter as well as the newspaper report vide newspaper dated 09.12.2014.
The Municipal Commissioner, Ajmer is required to submit entire details of the permissions of construction, granted in Ajmer in last five years, and the details of the unauthorised constructions and encroachments, which may have been identified, and the steps taken against such unauthorised constructions. The notices for all the respondents will be served in the office of learned Advocate General in the Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur, which shall be treated to be sufficient service on them.
List again on 10.02.2015.
4. On 27.02.2015, after receiving reply from Smt. Seema Sharma, Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, following order was passed by us:-
1. A reply has been filed by Smt. Seema Sharma, Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, in which it is stated that out of 2669 applications for grant of permission in relation to construction/ reconstruction/renovation of the buildings, permission was granted to 1081 applicants; the applications were rejected in respect of 1006 applicants; and 582 applications are pending consideration. In paragraph 3, she has stated that about 490 persons have made constructions unauthorizedly, and for that cases are pending. A list of the persons, who have constructed the buildings unauthorizedly, or in violation of the permission/against the norms, though permission was given as per the norms, has been annexed with the reply.
2. The list of unauthorized constructions, or those, who have made the constructions beyond the sanctioned plan and permissible limits, shows that a large number of constructions, in almost all the wards, have been made in violation of the buildings norms.
3. So far as the constructions of Shri Mahesh Tejwani and Smt. Pushpa Tejwani are concerned, it is stated that they had obtained the permission for commercial construction of a petrol pump, which was changed to construction of a hotel, on deposit of Rs.13,01,367/-. They have however, in making construction of a hotel, violated the building plans, for which notices have been given to them, and now the constructions have been sealed. It is also reported that an injunction order was passed on 07.07.2014 in a civil suit, by which its demolition was stayed.
4. We have examined the notice, by which constructions were sealed, and find that not only setbacks have been covered, but the constructions have also been raised beyond the permissible heights.
5. Now after the constructions have been seized and a suit for interim injunction has been filed, we do not propose to give ex parte directions.
6. Let notices be issued to Shri Mahesh Tejwani and Smt. Pushpa Tejwani, R/o 73, Laxmi Niwas, Ana Sagar Link Road, Ajmer, to show cause as to why the constructions raised by them beyond the sanctioned plans and permissible limits under the by-laws, beyond the compounding provisions, may not be directed to be demolished.
7. The concerned Civil Court is directed to decide the application for interim injunction, as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a period of two months.
8. The Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, shall proceed to take steps to seal all those constructions of the buildings, which have been raised without seeking any permission at all, and also without conversion of the land use. So far as deviation from the building plan is concerned, steps will be taken in accordance with the provisions of Sections 194(7)(f), 194(10)(b) and 10(i) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009 within four weeks.
9. The constructions which are beyond the permissible limits, and even beyond the compounding provisions, unless orders for compounding and compounding fee has been paid, shall be demolished.
10. Let the progres made in the steps taken in proceeding in the matter of 490 persons, be reported to the Court on the next date.
11. As an interim measure, we direct that the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ajmer will not permit any constructions without seeking sanction of building plans. The Municipal Corporation must carry out its statutory obligations with strict vigil, to protect the Heritage City for its development as Smart City by the Central Government.
12. List on 15.04.2015.
5. On 04.05.2015, the applications for intervention were allowed. The order dated 04.05.2015, is quoted as below:-
I.A. Application No.20476/2015 has been filed on behalf of Shri Prakash Janwani son of Shri Keemat Rai Janwani, Ashok Dadwani son of Shri Preetamdas and Shri Shivam Khemani son of Shri Nihal Chand Khemani and I.A. Application No.20624/2015 has been filed on behalf of Shri Ishwar Gidwani s/o late Shri Atmaram Gidwani for being impleaded as additional respondents.
The learned Advocate General and also the petitioner have no objection to the applications being allowed.
The applications No.20476/2015 and 20624/2015 are accordingly allowed. The persons named in the applications be added as additional respondents.
Counsel for the newly added respondents shall file amended cause title of the petition.
I.A. No.18711/2015 has been filed on behalf of Vipin Goyal for being impleaded as petitioner.
As the original petitioner is pursuing the matter diligently, we find no good ground to allow the application. The application is accordingly dismissed.
The Advocate General states that in compliance of order dated 27.02.2015 reply has been filed enumerating the effective steps taken by the Corporation. The reply is not on record. The registry shall trace the same and place it on record.
A copy of reply be also given to the petitioner as well as the newly added respondents.
List the case on 15th May, 2015.
6. Before we proceed to consider the submissions on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, in compliance of our orders, we may refer to the apprehensions raised by Shri Ravi Narchal, on whose letter this Public Interest Litigation was registered. He states that he is under constant threats from the Builders in the City of Ajmer, and as a whistle blower, he needs protection of his life and liberty.
7. Considering the importance of the matter and the number of unauthorized constructions, which have been seized or are likely to be seized/demolished, and which may affect a large section of the population of Ajmer, we direct the District Magistrate, Ajmer, to provide Shri Rajesh Narchal, the security of two gunman, to guard him and his house, and for protection of his life and liberty. We also direct the District Magistrate, Ajmer that, if the application filed by Shri Ravi Narchal for revolver license is pending, the same may be considered, expeditiously, and as far as possible within 15 days, taking into consideration the threat perception expressed by him in the Court, in accordance with law.
8. In the submissions, filed on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, the details of the action taken against the violators has been stated in paragraph 1(A) as follows:-
A. That it is pertinent to submit here that a survey was conducted in the year 2013 and it was found that some persons have made illegal constructions namely there was violation of approved map and norms and so also some persons started construction without permission and it was found that about 490 persons have committed such violation. The action has been taken against all the 490 persons, summary of which is given herein below: -
Sl. No. Details of action Number of cases
1.
Charge-sheets have been filed in the competent criminal court for prosecution 84
2. Directions have been issued for filing charge-sheets due to illegal constructions 15
3. Various persons after notice failed to stop construction and as such property has been seized.
254, In some cases orders have been passed but matters are pending in Revision Petition before the Director, Local Bodies, Jaipur.
95. In scrutiny it was found that certain matters were not within the competence of Municipal Corporation Ajmer and as such, these matters were transferred to Ajmer Development Authority.
106. After notice, matters were considered and found that the cases were not fit for further prosecution and as such files were consigned to record. So also after examination it was found that 5 Buildings were wrongly seized, hence seizure was removed.
19 57. Matters are pending for personal hearing 35
8. The construction which was found illegal and was demolished.
19. Notice under Section 194 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act have been issued and matter is pending consideration.
287Copy of the summary of cases referred to above along with the lists are submitted herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-A (colly.)
9. So far as Shri Manoj Gidwani is concerned, it is stated in the submissions, filed by the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, as follows:-
The property in question is situated near Roadways stand, Ajmer and measuring 203.01 sq. yards. The land owner applied for permission in relation to construction i.e. for basement + ground floor and two stories thereafter and so also permission was sought as commercial. After site inspection, the proposed plan was approved, but on 4th March, 2015, the Junior Engineer of the Corporation made a report that construction is in violation of the approved plan as the owner has covered the Balcony and the same is against the byelaws. It is also pertinent to submit here that such violation does not come under the Compounding Rules of 2014. The landlord was served with notice dated 16.3.2015 under section 194(10)(h) as the landlord has violated sanctioned map. The landlord submitted reply on 27.3.2015, but reply was not found just and proper and as such the landlord was served with a notice dated 30.3.2015 under section 194(10)(i) for further action. Thereafter, notice dated 14.5.2015 was given, giving details of the violation and the same was also replied on 26.5.2015 making a request for compounding the offence. However, the landlord was asked to submit the map showing existing constructed area, but he has not filed the same. On the contrary, against the notice under section 194(10(i), the landlord has filed a revision petition under section 327 before the Director Local Bodies Jaipur and next date of hearing in the revision petition is 7.9.2015 and as such matter is sub-judice before the Director Local Bodies.
10. The report also encloses the action taken against Shri Ashok Kumar Karamchandani(Star Marriage Garden/Home), Shri Ishwar Gidwani S/o late Shri Atma Ram, Shri Chandra Shekhar Rathore & Smt. Sudha Rathore (Hotel Ajmer Inn), Shri Daulat and Shri Suresh, sons of Shri Ramchandra (Mamta Saree).
11. From the report, we find that the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer has only made lip service to the orders passed by the Court. Whereas 287 notices were given under Section 194 of the Rajasthan Muncipality Act, 2009 (in short, 'the Act of 2009'), the matters are still pending consideration, and that despite large scale violations of the Bye-laws in making constructions, in which multiple floors have been added on the plots, only 84 charge-sheets have been filed for prosecution; 15 charge-sheets have been issued; 25 seizures have been made; and only in one case illegal constructions have been demolished.
12. From the report, we find that in almost all the cases, after the applications for compounding are made and orders are passed for rejecting, sealing and demolitions, the revisions have been filed before the Director, Local Bodies under Section 327 of the Act of 2009, in which either Director, Local Bodies grants stay, or passes an order of status-quo, and even if the revision is pending, the Municipal Corporation freezes and does not take action, either for seizure or for demolition.
13. We also find that in almost all the cases, the Director, Local Bodies, summons the records, which does not allow the Municipal Corporation to take any further steps in the matter.
14. A perusal of the provisions of Section 327 of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 2009, would show that the State Government or any officer authorized by it, may, for the purpose of being satisfied as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any order or resolution passed or purporting to have been passed, under the Act by or on behalf of a Municipality, its Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, any member or officer, call for the relevant record, and may, in doing so, direct that pending the examination of such record, such order or resolution shall be kept in abeyance and no action in furtherance thereof shall be taken until such examination by the State Government or by the officer authorized in this behalf by the State Government. In sub-section (2) of Section 327, on examining the record the State Government or the officer authorized, may rescind, reverse or modify such order or resolution and the order of the State Government or the officer authorized, shall be final and binding on the Municipality.
15. In our considered opinion, the supervisory powers under Section 327 of the Act of 2009, may be exercised only in exceptional cases, to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of any order or resolution, passed or purporting to have been passed, and that the power to rescind, reverse or modify such orders, must be resorted to , in case where there is clear violation of the provisions of law, which cannot be countenanced by the State Government. These powers cannot be used mechanically by the State Government merely for asking. The Director, Local Bodies, authorised by the State, has no power to call for the records in every case, unless he makes a detailed and reasoned order, in which he may disclose sufficient reasons for examination of the records. He may also resort to the powers of keeping the orders in abeyance and not to take any action, in exceptional cases. The interim orders should not be made without giving notice and opportunity of hearing to the Municipal Body, and giving sufficient reasons.
16. We, therefore, direct that henceforth, the Director, Local Bodies or any other authority of the State Government, in exercise of the powers under Section 327 of the Act of 2009, will not summon the records in a routine manner. He will have to give reasons for summoning the records, and that the interim orders will not be passed, until an opportunity is given to the Local Body, to be heard, after giving a notice to it, and sufficient reasons are recorded in making an interim order. In the cases, where reasons have not been given, the interim orders will not be allowed to continue, until reasons are recorded on the next date of hearing, and that wherever records have been summoned without giving any good reasons, the records will be immediately sent back. The records will be kept pending by the Director, Local bodies in any cases, whether after giving reasons or otherwise for more than one month.
17. We may also like to clarify regarding applicability of the Building Bye-laws and the compounding Bye-laws in the City of Ajmer. Prior to enforcement of the 'Nagar Parishad, Ajmer (Bhawan Nirman) Up Vidhiyan, 2001', the Bye-laws of 1970 were applicable. The Bye-laws of Nagar Parishad, Ajmer (Bhawan Nirman) Up Vidhiyan, 2001, are applicable to all the constructions, which are to be raised after the enforcement of these Bye-laws in respect of the new constructions, or where applications are made for further constructions, or for additional constructions, or for maintenance and repairs. No constructions are permissible, except in accordance with the Bye-laws, and until sanction is given by the Municipal Corporation, or Ajmer Development Authority, as the case may be.
18. It has been brought to our notice from the compliance report, that a large number of illegal constructions have been raised beyond the scope of the sanction, for which applications for compounding are kept pending for years altogether.
19. We make it clear that no construction is permissible without sanction of the building plans. If any construction is being made without sanction of the building plans, the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer is authorized and must seal the constructions, after giving a notice, and that the pendency of compounding application will not be a ground to open the seal, until and unless an application for compounding is decided.
20. So far as compounding of constructions is concerned, the Bye-laws of 1966 were applicable to the constructions raised, both, inside or outside the Wall City. The Bye-laws of 2014 have been made applicable under clause 1(b), to the areas, which are outside the Wall City. There can be no doubt about the applicability of these Bye-laws for compounding, and thus, the apprehension raised, that the Municipal Corporation has doubts about the applicability of the Bye-laws for compounding, has no substance at all. No application shall be kept pending on any argument raised on behalf of the violator, or about applicability of the Bye-laws for compounding.
21. We direct that the compounding Bye-laws must be strictly enforced, and that the compounding should not be permitted, and the desealing should not be made, until and unless the offender demolishes the constructions, which are raised beyond the compounding limits. To make it further clear, we direct that all the sealed constructions, made in violation of the Building Bye-laws, will not be desealed, until and unless the application for compounding is decided, strictly in accordance with the Bye-laws of 1966, or the Bye-laws of 2014, as the case may be, and that non-compoundable constructions are demolished in full either by the offender or the Local Body, at the cost of offender.
22. We are informed that a large number of unauthorized constructions are being raised in and around the 'Ana Sagar Lake', which is not only a valuable water source, but is also a place of pride, in the heritage City of Ajmer, which has now been declared as Smart City, to be developed by the Central Government.
23. We are also informed that the 'Ana Sagar Lake, is being encroached and constructions are being made, not only in the Lake area when it dries up during some of the months of the year, the constructions are also being raised around the Lake. These unauthorized constructions can easily be seen witnessed by everyone and identified.
24. The Officers of the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, present in the Court, admit that there are incomplete constructions in the 'Ana Sagar Lake', and constructions going around the Lake standing out of the water reminding that the Municipal Corporation has not carried out its duties of protecting the Lake from unauthorized encroachments.
25. We are informed that some of the portions/areas of the Lake are recorded as special class of khatedari, in which khatedars are permitted to cultivate the land when the said portion of the Lack dried up. We are unable to appreciate as to how the areas in the Lake can still be continued to be in khatedari of a person. It is paradoxical for the State to allow such an absurd situation to continue, in the garb of which unauthorized constructions are made in the area, surrounded by the Lake, which gets filled up with water in rainy season, and many months thereafter.
26. We are informed by learned Advocate General that proceedings have been initiated for acquisition of such land and the acquisition of the land in the area of the Lake, which is filled up with water during the rainy season, and further that a proposal of establishing a Lack Authority, is in active progress.
27. In order to avoid further deterioration of the Lake and raising of unauthorized constructions in and around the Lake, we find it imperative to issue directions that henceforth, no construction will be permitted within the area of the Lake. If the Municipal Corporation has not yet made demarcation of the Lake area, the same will be made by constructing sufficient number of pillars and thereafter with a boundary wall.
28. We further direct that the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer will demarcate the area of the Lake and will advertise it in the newspapers within 30 days, and no one will be permitted to make any constructions, nor any building plan will be sanctioned within 250 mtrs. of the radius of notified area of the 'Ana Sagar Lake'. If the area of the Lake is already notified, the same will be published for reminders to the general public, and for compliance of our orders. The Municipal Corporation, Ajmer will demolish all the constructions, which are inside the notified area of the boundary of the 'Ana Sagar Lake'.
29. The Municipal Corporation will continue to have strict vigil over the discharge of sewer and dumping of garbage in 250 mtrs. of the area around the Lake and prosecute the offenders.
30. We have also been informed that there are large number of dilapidated constructions in the Wall City, in and around 'Dargah'. The Municipal Corporation, Ajmer is directed to identify all dilapidated constructions, which have become dangerous and are posing threat to the human life, give notice to the owners and occupants of the same, to carry out its demolition, on their own. In case the owner, or the occupants/residents do not demolish such dangerous constructions within the period specified by the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, the Municipal Corporation will carry out demolition work, at the cost of the owners and occupants of such buildings.
31. This order is being made to save the lives of citizens of Ajmer, as such dangerous constructions, if remain existing, can collapse suddenly due to heavy rains, or for other reasons.
32. As regards the offending constructions raised by Shri Mahesh Tejwani, his application received in the Office of the Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Nigam, Ajmer, dated 24.12.2014, has been placed on record, and in which he had clearly stated that he has raised the constructions beyond the compoundable limits. He had prayed in the application that according to the Bye-laws of 2014, 10% of the setback in front, 30% in back and 25% in side, is compoundable. The area extended in the basement is also compoundable according to the compoundable limits, and that height upto 10% is also compoundable. He had also undertook to deposit the compounding fees, and gave an undertaking that any area found to be in non-compoundable limits, he will remove the same, on his own, within three months, and will get the site inspected.
33. We do not find any good reason for him to have filed a civil suit and obtaining an injunction order, and to have filed a revision petition under Section 327 of the Act of 2009, before the Director, Local Bodies, after giving an undertaking to demolish non-compoudable constructions.
34. We are informed by the Officers of the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, present in the Court, with the help of learned Advocate General, that Shri Mahesh Tejwani has not demolished the constructions, which are beyond the compoundable limits, and had sought extension of time for that purpose.
35. Learned counsel Mr. Dileep Sharma, appearing for respondent-Shri Mahesh Tejwani, has given an undertaking to the Court that Shri Mahesh Tejwani will withdraw the civil suit as well as the revision petition under Section 327, filed before the Director, Local Bodies. Let the suit and Revision be withdrawn, failing which on the undertaking given in the Court today, they will be dismissed.
36. Shri Mahesh Tejwani will get the constructions, raised beyond compoundable limits, demolished within 30 days, and get the site inspected before his application for compounding is considered, in accordance with law.
37. The Municipal Corporation, Ajmer is directed to decide his application within a period of six weeks, after being satisfied that he has demolished the constructions, which are not compoundable. The application will be decided, strictly in accordance with the Bye-laws, and that on such decision on the application, if the amount of compounding fees is not deposited, and non-compoundable area is not demolished, the same shall be demolished within a month by the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, without any further notice to him.
38. So far as the constructions raised by Shri Prakash Janwani, Shri Ashok Dadwani and Shri Shivam Khemani are concerned, it is admitted that these constructions are within the Wall City, and thus, the Bye-laws of 1966, are applicable for compounding the constructions.
39. As regards Shri Prakash Janwani is concerned, it is stated by the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer that he had purchased the property vide sale deed, dated 05.09.2013, from Shri Jagdish Swaroop Agarwal and Shri Amrit Agarwal. A report was made that the land owners were making illegal constructions, and on which a notice under Section 194(10)(h) of the Act of 2009, was given on 04.01.2014, to the original land owners, namely Shri Jagdish Swaroop Agarwal and Shri Amrit Agarwal. A reply was filed and that the new purchasers filed an application on 23.01.2014, with application fees for commercial use, and for map verification of the land. The revised map was also submitted for commercial use, after the Senior Town Planner asked the owners to do so on 16.04.2014. In the meantime, the constructions were raised and an application was moved for compounding, and on which the Senior Town Planner as well as the Assistant Engineer, Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, made it clear that the structure and the offence cannot be compounded. Two hearings were made, in which it was stated that the matter is subjudice to the High Court, and thus, no final order would be passed.
40. It is reported that not only extra floors have been added, the entire height of the construction, which is permissible upto 41 feet, has been raised upto 51.60 feet, and there are various other violations. We, thus, direct the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer to take an immediate action on the applications, which are pending, and to decide the same within a period of 30 days.
41. In the meantime, since there are admitted violations of the Building Bye-laws, and there are constructions, which are beyond the scope of compounding, we direct that the entire new constructions will be sealed by the Municipal Corporation. The applications will be decided after hearing the applicants, within a period of one month. All the non-compoundable constructions will be demolished, after giving a notice under the Act of 15 days to them.
42. We also issue direction to the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer, not to allow any further constructions in the City of Ajmer, unless the building plans are sanctioned. The Municipal Corporation shall not wait until the constructions are completed, or any compounding application, to be filed thereafter, to calculate the area, which may or may not be compoundable. The making of the constructions itself without sanctioned plan in violation of the Bye-laws, should not be permitted. No new, or additional constructions will be permitted without obtaining a sanctioned plan.
43. A complaint has been made about the discrimination in giving notices to the residents of the various localities. We do not find that any such material has been placed, nor do we expect the Municipal Corporation to make discrimination in checking, sealing or in demolition of illegal constructions, raised in violation of the Act of 2009 and the Building Bye-laws.
44. We may also observe here that the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer should not sit over the violations of the building plans, and must continue to make periodical inspections. The responsibility should be divided amongst the Zones and should be fixed upon the Officers and Engineers for taking a disciplinary action, if any unauthorized constructions are found in the area, on periodical inspections, to be made by the Municipal Corporation, Ajmer along with the Chief Town Planner and the Chief Engineer.
45. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of. If any person has a complaint of non-compliance, or violation of our directions, he/she may file an application in the proceedings, to be considered by the Court in accordance with law, after giving notice to the parties.
46. We make it clear that the holding of the elections in near future, or any religious festival like 'Urse' in the City of Ajmer, will not be a ground to give any lexity in compliance of our directions. The holding of the elections can not be a ground to delay the compliance of Court's directions and for carrying out a drive for checking of the unauthorized constructions and their demolitions.
(AJIT SINGH),J. (SUNIL AMBWANI),C.J. /KKC/ Certificate:
All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.
KAMLESH KUMAR P.A.