Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, argued that this writ petition could be treated as a representation and the corporation directed to take action on the same. We are not impressed by that submission. We see no reason why the petitioners should not themselves file a proper representation before the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Patiala setting out the nature of violations and praying for appropriate action in accordance with law i.e. particularly when the building in question is alleged to have been completed in 2001 and let out to different occupants thereafter who are making use of the same. We are also informed that municipal authorities have already issued a completion certificate in favour of the owners which implies that there were either no violations or the violations were duly compounded. Be that as it may, the petitioners would still be free to make a representation to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Patiala, in which event, the Municipal Commissioner is expected to look into the same and initiate appropriate action, if any, called for under the provisions of the Act and the bye-laws. In case, the issue has already been examined and appropriate orders regarding compounding of the alleged violations already passed, the Commissioner shall on receipt of the representation from the petitioners intimate to them about the said fact. Liberty is reserved to the petitioners to seek such redress as may be
