JUDGMENT :

WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, J.

Prayer:

1. Petitioners, through the medium of the instant writ petition, have sought the following reliefs:

i) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order No. 41 of 2025 dated 26.07.2025 passed by the Commissioner, Jammu Municipal Corporation (respondent No.1)

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to permit the petitioners to open their shops already found safe by the committee of officers headed by executive engineer PWD (respondent No.4)

Factual Matrix:

2. Petitioners are aggrieved of order No. 41/2025 dated 26.07.2025 issued by the Commissioner, Jammu Municipal Corporation, whereby it has been directed that a firm empanelled for safety audit of buildings by the Municipal Corporation, Jammu shall inspect and furnish a detailed report within one week regarding the safety of the building situated at 70, Exchange Road, Jammu.

3. By virtue of the aforesaid order, the Commissioner, Jammu Municipal Corporation, directed that the said inspection shall be carried out in the presence of representatives of the owners, i.e., respondent Nos. 6 and 7, as well as the tenants, i.e., the petitioners. The petitioners claim to be tenants and are running their respective businesses in the shops owned by respondent Nos. 6 and 7 for several decades at 70, Exchange Road, Jammu. It is the specific case of the petitioners that they have been carrying out lawful business activities from the said shops for decades and that the shops are their sole source of livelihood. It has also been clarified that the building consists of residential and commercial portions, and the petitioners are tenants in the commercial portion situated on the ground floor.

4. It is the specific case of the petitioners that respondent Nos. 6 and 7, with mala fide intention to forcibly evict them, submitted an application dated 29.08.2024 before the Jammu Municipal Corporation seeking declaration of the building as unsafe. Pursuant thereto, respondent No. 1 directed respondent Nos. 6 and 7 to obtain a safety/unsafety certificate from the Public Works Department vide communication dated 07.10.2024. Thereafter, respondent No. 4, Executive Engineer, PWD (R&B), Jammu East, issued communication dated 13.11.2024 declaring the building unsafe.

5. Based on the aforesaid communication, the Commissioner, Jammu Municipal Corporation, issued notice dated 07.01.2025, purportedly under Section 258(2) of the Jammu Municipal Corporation Act, 2000, directing demolition or securing/repair of the building within a period of 30 days from the receipt of the said notice, failing which, it was conveyed that action under rules shall be initiated against the petitioners. Although the said notice was addressed to respondent Nos. 6 and 7 but the same directly affected the petitioners, who were occupying the shops in question. Feeling aggrieved thereof, the petitioners preferred writ petition bearing WP(C) No. 299/2025, challenging the aforesaid notice dated 07.01.2025 and the communication dated 13.11.2024 on various grounds including violations of natural justice congenial between private owners and Municipal Authorities and also absence of any scientific inspection.

6. The further case of the petitioners is that they came to know of the aforesaid demolition notice only upon receiving eviction notice dated 22.01.2025 issued by respondent No. 1 claiming that the building had been declared unsafe and had to be vacated.

7. The matter did not end there. The Jammu Municipal Corporation issued yet another order dated 26.07.2025 vide No. 41/2025, allegedly in compliance with the direction passed by this Court on 16.07.2025, wherein after hearing both the parties as well as considering the clarification of the Executive Engineer, Division Jammu East, regarding issuing contradictory reports dated 13.11.2024 and 26.05.2025, it was held that the firm empanelled for safety audit of the building by Municipal Corporation, Jammu, shall be directed to inspect and fu