JUDGMENT

1. There were fifteen petitioners in the present writ application including Sabzi Mandi Dukandar Sangh as petitioner no.1. Considering the nature of grievance raised in the present writ application learned counsel for the petitioners has been permitted to delete the name of petitioner no. 1 from the cause title by an order dated 14.09.2021. Party position has been accordingly rearranged.

2. All the petitioners have a grievance that they had been carrying on their business on a land located East of Pearl Cinema (now demolished) with G.P.O. on the North, Crockery Shop on the South and Bihar Journal Hindustan Press on the West, which are covered by temporary construction and houses of various trades, commonly known as Sabzi Mandi.

3. They approached this Court seeking issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction restraining the respondents from interfering with the use of enjoyment by the petitioners "............ of the premises so leased by the respondents.........." and restraining them, further, from demolition of the structures of the shops of the petitioners.

4. It has been asserted that a general marking "to be demolished" has been done by the respondent Corporation in red ink asking all persons occupying the land for their business to vacate the same which is required for making Patna a smart city. They also assert that they have been paying municipal taxes and availing electricity connection provided by the South Bihar Power Distribution Company. On 07.06.2019, the officials of Patna Municipal Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) assisted by police force and officers of the State Administration came and asked the petitioners to vacate the premises within 48 hours else the shops would be demolished. In the aforesaid background, the petitioners filed this writ application on 11.06.2019, which came to be registered on 20.06.2019.

5. The petitioners filed an Interlocutory Application registered as 01 of 2019 seeking amendment in the writ application, as according to them, on 15.06.2019 all the shops over the land in question were demolished without making any alternative arrangement for the shopkeepers/vendors. It is their case that the writ petition was filed during the summer vacation before vacation Bench of this Court after taking due permission on 11.06.2019. On 14.06.2019, the respondents came, asking the shop-keepers to remove their articles within 24 hours. On 15.06.2019, however, the shops were demolished. With the said statement in the Interlocutory Application, they have sought amendment in the writ petition by way of seeking further direction to the respondents to immediately accommodate them by providing them alternative accommodation so that they may resume their livelihood and also compensate them for the loss caused to their business. When the case was taken up on 24.06.2019, the respondent-Corporation was directed to file counter affidavit and the matter was directed to be listed after six weeks.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances IA. No. 01 of 2019 is allowed. The relief sought for in the writ petition stands amended accordingly. The averments made in the Interlocutory Application have been treated to be part of the pleadings of the petitioners.

7. It is worthwhile mentioning, at this juncture itself, that in paragraph 3 of the writ application, it has been stated that the petitioners had approached this Court earlier also by filing C.W.J.C. No. 16645 of 2009, which was disposed of on 09.12.2009. A copy of the said order dated 09.12.2009 has been brought on record by way of Annexure-1 to the writ application. Petitioners of that case had apparently approached this Court against a general notice issued by the Corporation asking the shopkeepers to vacate the land. This Court had disposed of the writ petition reiterating well settled law that even a trespasser who had perfected his possession could not be summarily evicted and that he could be evicted only in accordance with the p