1. All the above petitions are heard and decided together by this common order as the Petitioners in Writ Petition (C) No.1197/2015, 1207/2015, 1209/2015 & 1604/2015 have similar interests compared to that of petitioner in Writ Petition (C) No.1196/2015 for the reasons that the petitioners in Writ Petition (C) No.1197/2015, 1207/2015, 1209/2015 are purchasers or have agreed to purchase the shops and other accommodations according to the agreement entered into between these petitioners with the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.1196/2015 and they have also prayed that the impugned order be set-aside. Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.1604/2015 is also a purchaser, who has prayed for relief of re-installation of electricity supply against respondent No.1, 2 & 3 and for direction to allow registration of transfer deed against respondent No.4 and 5.

2. This petition has been brought with a prayer for issuance of appropriate writs and for setting aside the impugned order dated 04.07.2015, passed by the Respondent No.2.

3. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner-company that the petitioner-company has constructed commercial/residential complex at Khasra No.232, 235, 236, 237, total area 0.827 hactare at Juna Bilaspur with the approval and permission of the respondents. The sanction was duly given on 14.12.2010 and thereafter on 03.09.2011. The construction is near completion, which was time to time inspected and verified by the respondents. All of sudden, a notice was issued by respondent No.2 on 04.07.2015 mentioning that the proposed front road from Shiv Talkies line on Khasra No.488 is not permissible and the approach road from Karbala side is only 36 feet wide, which should have been minimum 40 feet wide. Hence, because of these discrepancies, now, the complex can be permitted only for residential purposes and the petitioner company was directed to submit a fresh lay out and also directed to demolish the excess construction within 15 days.

4. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner-company that front road from Shiv Talkies line situated on Khasra No.488 was sanctioned and approved and the issue regarding shops present on Khasra No.488 has been decided by this Court. As alleged by the respondent that the petitioner-company has made excess construction, is not correct and the allegation that some modification has been made contrary to the sanctioned plan is inconsistent as the petitioner - company has constructed two unit staircase instead of one staircase. The petitioner-company has invested huge amount in the said construction and thus the order passed by respondent No.2 is arbitrary in nature. Some excess construction that has been done for that the petitioner company is ready to compound the same. It is submitted that the respondent Municipal Commissioner has held that the road lying on Khasra No.488 is not permissible for the construction of the petitioner, whereas, the permission has been granted to another builder to make use of the road lying on Khasra No.488 itself, which shows that the act of respondent No.2 is biased. Hon'ble the High Court has directed that shop situated on Khasra No.488 be removed and the same be used for public purpose. The other point raised in the notice regarding width of the Karbala road being of 36 feet is without any basis as the road that was available was of only 36 feet width at the time the construction was permitted and the petitioner-company is not in a position to increase the width of the said road.

5. After grant of sanction for construction by respondent No.2, passing of order dated 04.07.2015 is without jurisdiction as the respondent No.2 has no power to review its own order of sanctioning the construction. Respondent No.2 had no authority to raise objection regarding the width of the road as it was in the domain of the Town and Country Planning Department. The excess construction as alleged is made inside the building, there is no excess construction in the external area of the