- (1.) M. Katju, J. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 31-8-1996 (Annexure 15 to the writ peti tion ).
(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order. It appears that the petitioner made an unauthorised construction on canton ment land and in this connection notice was issued to him and thereafter the impugned order has been passed. I have jperused the impugned order and find no infirmity in the same. A perusal of the notice would show that the petitioner had made constructions of a hall, room and stair case without taking any sanction from the cantonment authorities. If such kind of illegal and unauthorised constructions are permitted on cantonment area, it will create a lot of difficulties for the military authorities. I am not inclined to exercise my discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 in this case. The petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed. .;