1. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned order of the High Court has been passed with undue haste. Some of the directions made by the High Court are vague and premature. As to para 11, it is submitted that no encroachment could have been directed to be removed and no demolition could have been ordered without recording a specific finding in that regard. The Municipal Corporation ought to have been directed to carry out a survey in the presence of the parties and identify encroachment and unauthorised construction, if any, so that the aggrieved party could have the remedy of approaching the Civil Court. As to para 10, it is submitted that the direction, if any, was called for against O.P. Saraswat who is in illegal possession of land in excess of what he is entitled to.

2. Issue notice to respondents 1 to 11. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that for the present notice is not required to be issued to respondents 12 to 24.

3. Until further orders, it is directed that the direction made by the High Court shall remain stayed until the Municipal Corporation has identified the boundaries of the land alleged to be public park and clearly identified, by taking measurements, the encroachment, if any. Needless to say such survey and identification shall have to be done in the presence of the parties likely to be affected adversely by the action of the Municipal Corporation.