Ms. Kamlesh Sharma, J.—The petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs : "(a) quash the orders Annexures P-13 and P-16; (b) direct the respondents to reconsider and allow the application for revalidation and extension of the previous sanetioned plans Annexures-Pl and P2 and grant extension in accordance with law; (c) direct the respondents to grant necessary sanction under the deeming provisions of the H.P. Municipal Corporation Act."

2. By impugned order dated 24.3.1999 (Annexure P-13) the Municipal Corporation, Shimla, asked the general power of attorney of the petitioner to submit revised plan of two dwelling units in accordance with Municipal Building Bye-Laws. This was in reply to the request of the petitioner for revising/revalidating the plan of the house of the petitioner which was earlier sanctioned on 27.4.1994. The other impugned order is dated 6.3.2000 passed by Financial Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Urban Development) Government of Himachal Pradesh (Annexure P-16), whereby the revision petition against the impugned order dated 24.3.1999 was rejected.

3. The case of the petitioner is that permission for the development of the plot comprised in khasra No. 862/888/10 in Mauza Station Ward, Shimla, Tehsil and District Shimla, was granted in his favour by Director, Town and Country Planning Department en 26.10.1993 (Annexure P-l). Thereafter, the permission for construction was granted by Municipal Corporation, Shimla, on 27.4.1994 (Annexure P-2). Accordingly, the petitioner made development of his plot for the purpose of establishment of printing press but when Town and Country Planning Department refused to grant approval for setting up the industrial unit on the ground that the plot in question is situated in the area ear-marked for residential purposes, the petitioner applied for change of the user of the land which was granted in his favour by the Government on 8.2.1995 (Annexure P-3) and he was permitted to use his plot for residential purposes. However, the petitioner had started construction of his building and sent requisite information thereof to the Municipal Corporation on 11.10.1994 (Annexure P-6).

4. The permission granted for the purchase of the plot under Section 118 of the H.P. Tenancy and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter called the Act), was assailed by one Shri Amin Chand Chauhan in-CWP No. 962 of 1994, which was disposed of on 21,2.1995 (Annexure P-7) expressing the hope that the notice to show cause under Section 118(1) of the Act issued to the petitioner, who was respondent No. 5 in the said petition, would be dealt with in an expeditious manner and action would be finalised in accordance with law. Thereafter, the competent authority, i.e. the Collector, Shimla, by his order dated 7.3.1995 (Annexure P-9) dropped the proceedings and discharges the notice to show cause issued to the petitioner by taking into consideration the permission dated 8.2.1995 granted in favour of the petitioner for the change of user of the building in question from commercial to residential purpose.

5. Against the order dated 7.3.1995 dropping the proceedings under Section 118 of the Act and also the order dated 8.2.1995 granting permission to change user of the land and the orders grain ting permission for development of the plot and construction of building another writ petition No. CWP 254 of 1995 was filed by Mohinder Chauhan and others. In this writ petition interim stay was granted by order dated 12.4.1995 (Annexure P-10) directing the petitioner and his general power of attorney to maintain status quo as on that date in respect of the construction over the land in question. The writ petition was ultimately dismissed by judgment dated 18.9.1998 reported in AIR 1999 HP 43 (Annexure P-l I) upholding the permission granted in favour of the petitioner for the change of user. It was thereafter that petitioner applied to Municipal Corporation, Shimla on 30.10.1998 (Annexure P-12) for renewal/revalidation