(Sanjay Karol, J.) -Petitioners as tenants have been residing in Building No. 9, Alley No. 12, Lower Bazar, Shimla-171001, H.P. for the last more than 50 years. On 20th December, 2003 the present petition was filed alleging that private respondents No. 4 and 5, in front of the tenanted premises have started construction of a new building in violation of the existing law. Their objections and representation dated 31th January, 2003 and 4th February, 2003, made to Municipal Corporation respondent No. 1 remain unattended and, therefore they have knocked the doors of the Court with the following prayers:

“1. To direct the respondents No. 1 to 3 to discharge their statutory duties and ensure the compliance of the provisions of the Interim Development Plan for Shimla Planning Area i.e. Annexure P-1 supra;

2. To direct the respondents No. 1 to 3 to ensure the compliance of the notification dated 22.8.2002 and notification dated 22.11.2002 Annexure P-7 and P-7A supra;

3. To direct the respondents No. 1 to 3 not to allow the respondents No. 4 and 5 to raise construction in violation of the aforesaid provisions of the Interim Development Plan for Shimla Planning Area, Annexure P-1 supra, and Annexure P-7 and P-7A supra;

4. To direct the respondents No. 1 to 3 to take appropriate steps while ensuring the compliance of the Regulation No. 10-4-1-2(x) Annexure P-1 as amended vide the notification dated 22-8-2002, Annexure P-7 and P-7A supra and to demolish the un-authorized construction raised by the respondents No. 4 and 5 from raising the construction of their building No. 79/1 Lower Bazar, Shimla in violation to the provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1977, H.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 and the Interim Development Plan for Shimla Planning Area;

5. To call for the entire relevant records of the case;

6. To award the cost of this writ petition in favour of the petitioners; and

7. To pass any other and further order(s) which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice in favour of the petitioners.”

2.The petition is resisted by the private respondents No. 4 and 5, on various grounds, inter alia, locus, delay and laches and misrepresentation of material facts. On merits, it is common case of all the respondents, as borne out from the record that in consonance with the provisions of the law. The respondents application for addition and alteration of the existing structure was allowed by the Municipal authority on 27th March, 1993 on the following terms:

Commissioner Order No. 45. AP

Dr. Shashi Sood, and Monika Sood, 79/1 Lower Bazar, Vidya Clinic has submitted proposed addition and alteration map in this department for approval.

There is no objection in the submitted map as per Himachal Pradesh Municipal Corporation Shimla Building Bye-laws but the construction should be done as per the structural design. In addition to this you are allowed to construct the building in a width of 6.62 mtrs. only.”

3.Thereafter, on annual basis the permission was extended vide various extension letters dated 20th July, 1995, 10th December, 1996 and 26th March, 1998 and last such extension was accorded on 5th October, 2002, whereby the petitioners were allowed to complete the construction within a period of one year, subject to the condition laid in the original sanctioned letter dated 27th March, 1993.

4.The representations and the complaint filed by the petitioners were considered and dropped vide Municipal Commissioner’s order dated 3rd January, 2004 on the ground that the construction being raised was in accordance with the approved plan.

5.Admittedly the sanction in question is governed by the provisions of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the “Municipal Act:”), the H.P. Town and Country Planning Act, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as the “Planning Act”) and the Interim Development Plan for Shimla Planning Area (hereina