Sangeet Lodha, J.

These writ petitions are directed against the action of the respondent-Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti ('KUMS') and the Municipal Board, Rawatsar in issuing notice to the petitioners to remove the encroachment made over pids i.e. platforms in front of the shops in Food Grain Mandi run by KUMS.

2. The relevant facts are that the proprietor of the petitioner Shri Ram Iron Store, a proprietorship concern (in writ petition No.3482/11), purchased the shop No.12 in Grain Mandi, Rawatsar from its original allottee Chandanmal by way of a registered sale deed dated 29.3.88. The petitioner is carrying on business of sale of paints, sanitary goods, pipe fitting goods, plastic goods, cement, welding rod, pump set accessories and all types of mechanical parts and diesel engine etc. since 1989 in the said shop. There exists an open space of the size 30'x65' in front of shops in the Grain Mandi commonly known as pid which according to the petitioner is being used by the owners of the respective shops for keeping their goods during the working hours of the shop which is necessary for beneficial use of the shops purchased. The Secretary, KUMS issued a notice dated 15.4.11 directing the petitioner to remove the encroachment made on the pids stating that the same is creating great difficulties for the traders carrying on business of agriculture produce.

3. Similarly, the father of the proprietor of the petitioner M/s. Joshi Iron Store Pvt. Ltd., a proprietorship concern (in writ petition no.3692/17), purchased a shop from one Shri Dulichand, who was allotted the said shop in Food Grain Mandi operated by KUMS, Rawatsar, which is also engaged in carrying on business of sale of cement, rods, paints, iron goods, spare parts, iron and steel etc. The proprietor of the petitioner concern has been served with a notice issued by the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Rawatsar directing him to remove the encroachment made on pids of Food Grain Mandi by putting iron goods, plastic pipes, bazari, grit etc. thereon.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that the platform in front of the shops forms part of the shops and therefore, petitioners cannot be deprived of the beneficial use thereof. Learned counsel submitted that if the pid is permitted to be used for the purpose of keeping agriculture produce of the farmers, it will amount to putting unreasonable restriction on the right of the petitioners inasmuch as it will obstruct the entry to the petitioners' shop and thus, the action of the respondent Municipal Board in directing the petitioners to remove its goods put on the platform, is ex facie illegal and arbitrary.

5. Mr. Vishal Singhal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in writ petition no.3692/17, further submitted that admittedly, the Mandi Area is owned, regulated and controlled by KUMS and therefore, the Municipal Board, Rawatsar has no jurisdiction to inter meddle in the matter and thus, the notice issued is ex facie without jurisdiction.

6. Mr. Pankaj Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent KUMS in Writ Petition No.3482/11 submitted that from bare perusal of the Deed of Sale of Leasehold Rights executed in favour of the original allottee, makes it abundantly clear that the pids in front of the shops were never part of the shops and therefore, the contention sought to be raised by the petitioner that it is entitled to use the pids for storage of their goods is absolutely baseless. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner cannot be permitted to encroach upon the land which is not part of the premises sold by KUMS in favour of its predecessor in title and therefore, the action of the respondent in directing the petitioner to remove the encroachment made, cannot be faulted with. Learned counsel submitted that the Mandi Area now stands transferred to the Municipal Board and therefore, the Municipal Board is well within its jurisdiction to initiate the action for removal of the encroachmen