In this PIL, the petitioner sought demolition of alleged illegal constructions in South Delhi. The court held allegations were vague and lacking material particulars, leading to dismissal of the petition.
None granted; petition dismissed for vagueness of allegations.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~16
EK JUT SOCIETY ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Sumeet Kaul, Adv.
versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
& ANR ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Kapil Dutta, Adv. for Mr.Ajay Arora, Adv. for SDMC.
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
O R D E R % 04.03.2016
CHIEF JUSTICE
JAYANT NATH, J
MARCH 04, 2016 /pmc
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a PIL alleging vague unauthorized constructions can be entertained seeking demolition directions.
EK JUT SOCIETY
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
JAYANT NATH
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
