2026:HHC:15739 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. : 24 of 2024 Decided on : 11.05.2026 Rattan Chand Sood & Anr. …Petitioners Versus Architect Planner MC Shimla & Ors. …Respondents The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioners : Mr. Sumit Sood, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No. 1 and 2. Mr. Digvijay Singh Bisht & Mr. Sumit Sharma, Advocates, for respondent No. 3. Ms. Richa Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 4. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) The petitioners have filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to set aside the order dated 04.12.2023, passed by learned District Judge Shimla, in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, Case No. 3-S/14 of 2019, titled as “Rattan Chand & Anr. Versus Architect Planner, Municipal Corporation Shimla & Ors.”, as well as, the order dated 04.12.2018, 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:15739 passed by the Commissioner M.C. Shimla, directing the petitioners to remove the unauthorized construction. 2. During the pendency of the present petition, this Court has passed the following order on 25.09.2025:- “In pursuance to the previous order, it is pointed out by the counsels that the parties and the Junior Engineer, MC Shimla, had visited the spot. The learned counsel for the Corporation, on instructions received from the JC, MC, Shimla, who is present in the Court, submits that the specific unauthorized construction had been pointed out to the petitioners. However, till date, the same has not been completely removed. Let the same be positively removed by the petitioners on or before 30.09.2025. On 30.10.2025, the Junior Engineer, MC, Shimla, shall visit the spot, if the unauthorized construction, as pointed out, has not been removed, then Corporation shall remove the same, on its own, at the expense to be recovered from the petitioners. List for compliance on 10.10.2025.” 3. In compliance of the said order, compliance affidavit has been filed and thereafter, on 30.12.2025, this Court has passed the following order:- “Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in so far as infraction pointed out in annexure P4 and P-5 i.e. notices issued under Section 253 read with Section 242 of the H.P. Municipal Act 1994 are concerned, the same have been removed. Let affidavit to this extent be filed by the petitioners. Factual position based on the affidavit be ascertained by the officer(s) of the Municipal Corporation and appropriate affidavit in this regard be filed by the concerned officers of the M.C. Let, needful be done on or before next date of hearing. List on 10.03.2026.” 3 2026:HHC:15739 4. In compliance of the order dated 30.12.2025, the petitioners have filed the affidavit on 26.04.2026. 5. The factual position, as mentioned in the affidavit, has been verified by respondents No. 1 and 2. In this regard, para-wise comments have been filed in the open Court. 6. In view of the above, when, the order dated 04.12.2018, now has been complied with, as such, no further action is required to be taken, in the present petition. 7. Since, the unauthorized construction has been removed, as such, order dated 04.12.2018, passed by M.C. Shimla, so also the order dated 04.12.2018, passed by the learned District Judge, are liable to be set aside. Ordered accordingly. The petition is disposed of accordingly, so also the pending applications, if any. (Virender Singh) 11th May, 2026 Judge (Pramod Kumar)