SUNITA AGARWAL, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vishal Khandelwal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Suyash Agrawal, learned counsel for respondent no. 5 and Sri S.C. Dwivedi holding brief of Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 3 and 4 and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and 2.
(2.) CHALLENGING the order passed by the appellate authority dated 16.1.2015, the short submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners who are occupants of the shops in question namely shop nos. 1 to 4 in plot no. 59, Lajpatkung, Agra be provided an opportunity to put their case before the Development Authority.
(3.) BRIEF facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that a demolition order dated 27.9.2001 was passed for demolition of five shops illegally constructed over plot no. 59, Lajpatkunj, Agra. The demolition order was passed against the then owner namely Sri Manohar Lal Vrindani. It was never challenged by the owner and it appears that the petitioners were inducted as tenant in the shops in question after the demolition order was passed. The proceedings were kept pending and the Development Authority did not proceed for demolition rather issued notice on 7.10.2010 and reiterated the demolition order dated 27.9.2001 to the petitioners. The petitioners were called upon to submit relevant documents to substantiate their ownership or to show any permission to raise construction. These notices were issued separately upon the occupants including three petitioners in the present writ petition. Challenging the notices, appeals were filed by the petitioners before the Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra which were connected with other appeals pending with regard to the same property. All the appeals were decided together by order dated 16.1.2015. A finding has been recorded by the appellant authority that the demolition order dated 27.9.2001 was passed with regard to five shops out of Nine shops constructed illegally over the plot in question. Further from the records it is established that the said order was passed with regard to shop nos. 5 to 9. It was, therefore, held that the Development Authority is free to execute the demolition order with regard to those five shops. The appeals were dismissed.;