- (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for parties and perused the pleadings of the writ petition.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for petitioner submitted that under some agreement with Municipal Corporation a temporary permission was granted to the petitioner till 31.03.2010 to run a P.C.O. by constructing a temporary structure on the road side. Now, a notice has been given for removal of the encroachment which would be too harsh for the petitioner, a poor person who would loose the means of his livelihood. Learned Counsel also submitted that even the police/security personnel and other departments of government are also using the lands on road sides and other public lands for the purpose of their work. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the Municipal Corporation submitted that the existence of temporary structure on both sides for commercial use may cause traffic congestion and in particular, inconvenience to the pedestrians. Learned Counsel also referred to an order of a coordinate Bench of this Court dated 23.12.2009 passed in Writ Petition No. 11963 (MB) of 2009 wherein a direction had been given for deciding the representation of petitioner in a PIL filed by an advocate of this Court but we do not find any direction which may advance the submissions on behalf of petitioner. The said order on reproduction reads as: Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri S.K. Upadhyaya and learned State Counsel. Grievance raised by the petitioner in the instant writ petition mainly relates to the traffic congestion in the city of Sultanpur, which concerns with the district administration and traffic authorities. His grievance is that various constructions and commercial complexes have been allowed to be made by the opposite parties reducing the space earmarked for the pedestrians. There is misutilization by the shopkeepers and the owners of the complexes, who park their vehicles in front of the shops and complexes by barricading the road.
(3.) THE petitioner cannot seek parity with police/security personnel/law enforcing agency and other organisations like National Highway Authority of India, P.W.D., Electricity and Telephone departments which by virtue of nature of services rendered by them, can be allowed to raise pre -fabricated structures with pup panelling, detachable or temporary structure on public land even on road sides and the lands belonging to, or under the control of Municipality/Municipal Corporations/Hospitals or Forest department provided that such use and occupation of land would not cause any security hazards to public. Thus, running a commercial activity from a public land, which may cause traffic hazards or inconvenience to public, cannot be permitted to continue only for the reason that the petitioner is running a P.C.O. under a temporary licence of Public Authority, which is visited and used by the men of public.;