COCP No.3184 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 146 ANJU Vs ROOPAM, CHAIRMAN, BUILDING COMMITTEE SESSION DIVISION GURUGRAM, HARYANA CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Present: Mr. Sumit Singh Bairagi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Advocate Ms. Tamanna Banwala, Advocate for the respondent. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) 1. By way of present Courts Act, 1971 respondent on account of alleged willful violation of order 27.02.2024 passed by 2024 respectively 27.02.2024 passed by th thereof is extracted hereunder: at construction of porta cabins from the roof of Chamber No.123, Block A, Judicial Complex, them on 0 Committee of Sessions Division, out a survey of all porta cabins that have violation of the building plan/lay out plan and the same are to be removed forthwith from Lawyers' Chambers, Blocks A and B. 2024 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.3184 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: ROOPAM, CHAIRMAN, BUILDING COMMITTEE SESSION DIVISION GURUGRAM, HARYANA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ Mr. Sumit Singh Bairagi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kshitij Sharma, Advocate with Ms. Tamanna Banwala, Advocate for the respondent. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) By way of present petition filed under Section Courts Act, 1971, prayer has been made for initiation of proceedings against the respondent on account of alleged willful violation of order passed by this Court in CWP No.7895 of 2024 and CWP No.3658 of respectively. The order dated 08.04.2024 27.02.2024 passed by this Court in CWP No.3658 of 2024, thereof is extracted hereunder:- “The present petition is accordingly disposed of as not pressed this stage with a direction to the petitioners to remove the construction of porta cabins from the roof of Chamber No.123, Block A, Judicial Complex, Gurugram within the period as undertaken by them on 09.02.2024 and reiterated today in Court. The Building Committee of Sessions Division, Gurugram is also directed to carry out a survey of all porta cabins that have violation of the building plan/lay out plan and the same are be removed forthwith from Lawyers' Chambers, Blocks A and B. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.3184 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 26.03.2025 ......Petitioner ROOPAM, CHAIRMAN, BUILDING COMMITTEE SESSION DIVISION ....Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Sumit Singh Bairagi, Advocate with petition filed under Section12 of the Contempt of , prayer has been made for initiation of proceedings against the respondent on account of alleged willful violation of orders dated 08.04.2024 this Court in CWP No.7895 of 2024 and CWP No.3658 of he order dated 08.04.2024 was based upon the decision dated is Court in CWP No.3658 of 2024, the operative part etition is accordingly disposed of as not pressed this stage with a direction to the petitioners to remove the construction of porta cabins from the roof of Chamber No.123, Block Gurugram within the period as undertaken by reiterated today in Court. The Building Gurugram is also directed to carry out a survey of all porta cabins that have been constructed in violation of the building plan/lay out plan and the same are directed be removed forthwith from Lawyers' Chambers, Blocks A and B. 1 12 of the Contempt of , prayer has been made for initiation of proceedings against the dated 08.04.2024 & this Court in CWP No.7895 of 2024 and CWP No.3658 of based upon the decision dated he operative part etition is accordingly disposed of as not pressed this stage with a direction to the petitioners to remove the construction of porta cabins from the roof of Chamber No.123, Block– Gurugram within the period as undertaken by reiterated today in Court. The Building Gurugram is also directed to carry been constructed in directed MOHMED ATIK 2025.03.29 12:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP No.3184 of 2024 The petitioners would, however, be at liberty to initiate action against the having made building plan and may under law. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per direction issued by the Writ Court vide order dated 27.02.2024, the respondent was action against all the lawyers chambers in Block A & B in case the construction was in violation of t 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that perusal of the direction issued vide order dated 27.02.2024 was confined only to carry out survey of porta cabin building plan/lay out plan in the lawyers chamber submits that upon survey conducted by the District Building Committee Division, Gurugram along with the Executive Engineer, PWD (B&R), Gurugram, it has been found that only 70 porta cabins are in existence over the lawyers chamber in Block A & B which is even less than the approved/sanctioned number of 81 porta cabins 4. I have heard learned counsel fo paper book. I am unable to find substance in the submissions made on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Perusal of the order dated was to conduct a s in Block A & B which has already been carried out and even found less number of porta cabins than the approved/sanctioned number of 2024 (O&M) The petitioners would, however, be at liberty to initiate action against responsible person in the District Bar Association, Gurugram for having made an allotment of porta cabin, in violatio building plan and may pursue such action as is available to them under law. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per direction issued by the Writ Court vide order dated 27.02.2024, the respondent was action against all the lawyers chambers in Block A & B in case the construction was in violation of the building plan/lay out plan. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that perusal of the direction issued vide order dated 27.02.2024 was confined only to carry out survey of porta cabins that were constructed in violation of sa building plan/lay out plan in the lawyers chamber submits that upon survey conducted by the District Building Committee Division, Gurugram along with the Executive Engineer, PWD (B&R), Gurugram, ound that only 70 porta cabins are in existence over the lawyers chamber in Block A & B which is even less than the approved/sanctioned number porta cabins and, thus, no contempt is made out against the respondent. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I am unable to find substance in the submissions made on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner. Perusal of the order dated 27.02.2024 to conduct a survey of porta cabins situated at first floor of lawyers chambers in Block A & B which has already been carried out and even found less number of porta cabins than the approved/sanctioned number of The petitioners would, however, be at liberty to initiate action against responsible person in the District Bar Association, Gurugram for an allotment of porta cabin, in violation of the approved pursue such action as is available to them Petition stands disposed of accordingly.” Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per direction issued by the Writ Court vide order dated 27.02.2024, the respondent was required to take action against all the lawyers chambers in Block A & B in case the construction he building plan/lay out plan. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that perusal of the direction issued vide order dated 27.02.2024 was confined only to constructed in violation of sanctioned building plan/lay out plan in the lawyers chambers in Block A & B. He further submits that upon survey conducted by the District Building Committee of Session Division, Gurugram along with the Executive Engineer, PWD (B&R), Gurugram, ound that only 70 porta cabins are in existence over the lawyers chamber in Block A & B which is even less than the approved/sanctioned number and, thus, no contempt is made out against the respondent. r the parties and gone through the paper book. I am unable to find substance in the submissions made on behalf of 27.02.2024 clearly shows that the direction urvey of porta cabins situated at first floor of lawyers chambers in Block A & B which has already been carried out and even found less number of porta cabins than the approved/sanctioned number of porta cabins. No direction 2 The petitioners would, however, be at liberty to initiate action against responsible person in the District Bar Association, Gurugram for n of the approved pursue such action as is available to them Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per direction issued to take action against all the lawyers chambers in Block A & B in case the construction On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits that perusal of the direction issued vide order dated 27.02.2024 was confined only to nctioned in Block A & B. He further Session Division, Gurugram along with the Executive Engineer, PWD (B&R), Gurugram, ound that only 70 porta cabins are in existence over the lawyers chamber in Block A & B which is even less than the approved/sanctioned number r the parties and gone through the paper book. I am unable to find substance in the submissions made on behalf of clearly shows that the direction urvey of porta cabins situated at first floor of lawyers chambers in Block A & B which has already been carried out and even found less number of . No direction MOHMED ATIK 2025.03.29 12:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment COCP No.3184 of 2024 was ever issued vide or 08.04.2024 that any kind of survey was to be conducted of the lawyers chambers in Block A & B. 6. In such circumstances, no cause survives in the instant petition. The same stands dismissed. Rule stands discharge 7. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. March 26, 2025 Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2024 (O&M) was ever issued vide order dated 27.02.2024 or even 08.04.2024 that any kind of survey was to be conducted of the lawyers chambers in In such circumstances, no cause survives in the instant petition. The same stands dismissed. Rule stands discharged. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (HARKESH MANUJA) 5 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No d 27.02.2024 or even by way of order dated 08.04.2024 that any kind of survey was to be conducted of the lawyers chambers in In such circumstances, no cause survives in the instant petition. The All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 3 order dated 08.04.2024 that any kind of survey was to be conducted of the lawyers chambers in In such circumstances, no cause survives in the instant petition. The MOHMED ATIK 2025.03.29 12:39 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment