Rajiv Sharma, Rakesh Srivastava, JJ. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel and perused the record.
(2.) The petitioners were in possession of meat shops, which belonged to Nagar Palika Parishad, Pratapgarh. A policy decision had been taken by the Nagar Palika Parishad to construct new shops after demolishing the old shops. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision of the Nagar Palika Parishad, the petitioners filed a suit of permanent injunction (Suit No.786/95) before the Civil Judge (S.D.), Pratapgarh, alongwith application for temporary injunction under Order 39, Rule 1 C.P.C. The said application was rejected by the Civil Judge vide order dated 24.4.1996, against which the petitioner filed appeal (bearing No.31 of 1996) before the District Judge, Pratapgarh, wherein stay order was granted in favour of the petitioners, staying the demolition of the shops. In disobedience of the said interim injunction order granted by the District Judge in the appeal, the shops in question were demolished by the opposite party nos.3 and 4 and new shops were constructed.
(3.) When the said disobedience of temporary injunction order on the part of opposite party nos.3 and 4 was brought to the notice of this court, vide order dated 28.10.2005 the court directed the Executive Officer of Nagar Palika Parishad (respondent no.4) to appear before this court and explain as to under what authority, the petitioners' shops had been demolished, when the demolition was stayed under the temporary injunction order passed by the competent court. In compliance of the said order, the executive officer of Nagar Palika Parishad appeared before this court on 10.11.2005 and tendered unconditional apology, and assured the court that the petitioners would be considered for allotment of their shops, whereupon this court did not intend to proceed further against the Nagar Palika Parishad.;