JUDGMENT

Sanjay Karol, A.C.J. - The questions, which arise for consideration in these petitions, are:

i) . As to whether insertion of Section 30-B, by virtue of the Himachal Pradesh Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act, 2016, in the Himachal Pradesh Town & Country Planning Act, 1977, is contrary to the object and purpose of the said Principal Act, as also ultra vires the Constitution of India?

ii) . As to whether the constitutional validity of the amending provision is not ultra vires the Constitution, in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in Consumer Action Group vs. State of T.N., (2000) 7 SCC 425?

iii) . As to whether arbitrariness cannot be a ground for holding the amendment to be ultra vires the Constitution, in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in Binoy Viswam vs. Union of India & others, (2017) 7 SCC 59?

iv) . If not, then as to whether the amendment is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, being arbitrary, irrational, illogical, capricious and unreasonable, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Shayra Bano vs. Union of India, (2017) 9 SCC 1?

v) . If the amendment is ultra vires, then as to whether it can be saved by adopting the doctrine of