Constitution of India

— Art. 226 — Exercise of power under Art. 226, by High Court — Relief — Approach: Considerations involved therein — Duty to ensure that defiers of law are not rewarded — Predecessor of the writ petitioner putting up construction in a controlled area in defiance of statutory provisions and in spite of notices and orders from the authorities to stop such construction — Writ petitioner purchasing the same and seeking the authorities to accept compounding fee and condone the violations made by his predecessor — Such a request rightly rejected by the authorities and High Court rightly refused interference therewith, (2006) 7 SCC 597-A

Town Planning

Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 (41 of 1963)

— Ss. 14, 3, 6, 7, 10 and 12 — Compounding of offences — When permissible — Held, permissible only in case of marginal or insignificant accidental violations unconsciously made after trying to comply with all the requirements of law and not when the violations are deliberate, designed, reckless or motivated — Further held, regularisation is not the rule but a rare exception, (2006) 7 SCC 597-B

Town Planning

Punjab Scheduled Roads and Controlled Areas Restriction of Unregulated Development Act, 1963 (41 of 1963)

— Ss. 4, 14, 3, 6, 7, 10 and 12 — Violations of the Act — Mitigating effect, if any, of the area concerned subsequently coming within municipal limits — Even in such a case, the violations cannot be condoned by the authorities under the law governing the municipalities or by any other authority or court, (2006) 7 SCC 597-C

Constitution of India

— Art. 136 — Exercise of power under, by Supreme Court — Relief — Recall of order/judgment — Grounds for — Counsel for petitioner not appearing at hearing — Leave granted and appeal dismissed on merits — Appellant seeking restoration of the appeal by recalling the said order — Appellant explaining the reasons for the inability of the counsel to be present on the date of hearing — Keeping in view that the appeal had been disposed of without hearing the counsel, application for restoration of the appeal allowed — Appeal thereafter heard and disposed of, (2006) 7 SCC 597-D