' The factual background of the controversy, subject-matter of this petition is that petitioner resides in a house situated in locality known as Beroon Kot Piran of Kasur. Respondents 1 and 2, have, in the house adjoining to the house of the petitioner, installed powerlooms which they operate day and night. The petitioner complains that vibration being caused by operating powerlooms has damaged his house while deafening noise is a constant source . Of nuisance to the petitioner and his family membeRs, According to the petitioner, these powerlooms were installed in contravention of resolution dated 15-12-1964 of the Municipal Committee, Kasur as licence to operate powerlooms cannot be granted unless neighbours residing within 25 yards distance from the proposed site give consent. It was asserted that powerlooms were installed without getting consent of the petitioner and that the agreement alleged to have been executed by the petitioner and respondents 1 and 2 is fake document and that the said document was adjudged so even by the Assistant Commissioner. It was further argued that the licence obtained by the respondents through false representation was challenged by filing appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Kasur who accepted the appeal vide order dated 27-4-1985 and the Chairman of the Municipal Committee was directed to act according to resolution of the Municipal Committee dated 15-12- 1964.
2. The order dated 27-4-1985 of the Deputy Commissioner was challenged by the respondents in this Court in Constitution Petition (W.P.No, 1928/1985) but the same was dismissed vide order dated 10-6-1987 on account of non-prosecution. The application seeking restoration of the writ petition was also dismissed on 21-6-1987. It was further averred that respondents 1 and 2 filed a civil suit at Kasur and alongwith the suit an application for temporary injunction was submitted but the temporary injunction was refused. Howeve, the said suit is still pending.
' Grievance of the petitioner is that despite the fact that respondents 1 and 2 do not hold any valid licence and that the application for the grant of temporary injunction stands dismissed, still no action has been taken by the Municipal Committee to bring to end the nuisance being created by the respondents. The petitioner on these averments and pleas seeks a direction to the Chief Officer of Municipal Committee, Kasur to act upon the resolution dated 15-12-1964 and immediately ensure stoppage of working of the powerlooms of respondents 1 and 2.
3. The respondents though were successful in obtaining licence to operate the powerlooms from 1989 to 30-6-1991 but it was conceded by the Committee in its latest comments that the licence could not legally issue to respondents 1 and 2 and thereafter, licence was not granted to respondents.
4. The position of the resolutions passed on the subject by the Municipal Committee, Kasur is that first resolution dated 15-12-1964 provides that consent of neighbours would be a condition precedent to the granting of licences for operating powerlooms. The second is resolution No, 16 dated 5-4-1989, wherein the condition of obtaining consent of neighbours was done away with in respect of certain localities including Beroon Kot Piran. The Third resolution on the subject is No, 24 dated 26-6-1989 which reads as under:-- {{URDU TEXT}} ' The position which, thus, emerges is that presently resolution dated 15-12-1964 holds the field and secondly the order of the Deputy Commissioner dated 27-4-1985 passed in appeal is also operative and effective in law. Even otherwise, admittedly respondents 1 and 2 were not granted licence since 1-7-1991. The present operation of the powerlooms in the house adjoining to the house of the petitioner is, therefore unauthorised.
5. This being the situation, the Chairman and Chief Officer of the Municipal Committee, Kasur are bound under law to implement the order dated 27-4-1985 of the Deputy Commissioner and ensure that in case the respondents unauthorisedly operate the powerlooms in the premises in question, power vesting in them under section 73 of the Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979 is involved so as to eliminate the nuisance. If the respondents insist on creating nuisance, the machinery of criminal law can also be made operative. The Authorities concerned should always see that the law prevails and the citizens are made to obey the law and to act in accordance with law.
6. The other aspect of the matter to be noticed is that the Municipal Committee has yet to formulate its policy with regard to the localities of Kasur in which working of machinery needs to be regularised. This is apparent from resolution No, 24 passed on 26th June, 1989. This question should be attended to by the Committee keeping in view not only the law on the subject but also economic, social and cultural demands of the citizens of the city. The conflicting interests of different segments of society should be resolved by the City Fathers in the best interest of the citizens. It will be therefore, advisable that this question is resolved by the Committee as early as possible so that the citizens are in a position to order their affairs in accordance with law.
7. With the observations recorded above, this petition is accepted. The respondents shall implement the order of the Deputy Commissioner and shall take appropriate measures to stop the working of powerlooms of respondents 1 and 2. In case the locality known as Baroon Kot Piran is ultimately declared as factory area or the Committee decides to allow installation and running of powerlooms in the said area on fulfilment of certain conditions, the respondents if comply with the said conditions may seek licence in accordance with law. The parties are left to bear their own costs.