AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sureshwar Thakur, J
Since respondent No.4, has, commenced the statutory proceedings against respondents No.5 and 6, for, the latters purportedly deviating from the sanctioned plan, thereupon, until respondent No.4, concludes the afore proceedings, hence, sub judice before him, thereupon, this Court may not have the jurisdiction, to, entertain the extant writ petition.
Consequently, the extant writ petition is disposed of with a direction, to, co-respondent No.4, to, within eight weeks from today, conclude the statutory proceedings raised against co-respondents No.5 and 6, and, in the afore proceedings, respondent No.4, shall grant an opportunity, of, being heard, to, both, the writ petitioner, and, to, co-respondents No.5 and 6. Moreover, respondent No.4, is also directed, to, within the afore period, hence, ensure that a valid demarcation of the relevant site is conducted by the Assistant Collector 1st/2nd Grade, Dharamshala, for, ascertaining whether respondents No.5 and 6, rather making purported encroachments upon the land co-owned and possessed by respondent No.4. After the report of the afore Demarcating Officer, is, placed before co-respondent No.4, the petitioner and co-respondent, No.5 and 6, shall appear before him, and, thereafter a decision in accordance with law, would come to be recorded by co-respondent No.4, upon, the afore demarcation report, and, also, upon the afore, drawn statutory proceedings. Moreover, as submitted by Shri Ashwani Sharma, the learned Senior Advocate, no order prejudicial, to, the interest of any, of, the contesting litigants, shall be pronounced, unless, all adequate opportunity, of, adducing evidence, and, also, of, addressing argument(s), is, afforded to all. Accordingly, the extant writ petition is disposed of. No costs. All pending applications stand disposed of.