This Order addresses a writ petition regarding demarcation proceedings in Delhi Village Mamurpur. Recognizing the petitioner failed to file a representation, the bench of Justice Indermeet Kaur treated the petition itself as a representation and disposed of the matter.
The writ petition is treated as a representation and disposed of.
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.
$~18
PARVEEN KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.P.S. Rana & Mr.Ratnesh Kant, Advs.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Ms.Swaty Singh Malik with Mr.Harsh Nagar, Advs. for R-1. Mr.Vikram Nandrajog with Mr.Abhimanyu Singh Khatri & Mr.Abhishek Khanna, Advs. for R-2 & 3.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
O R D E R
% 01.08.2016
Petitioner is aggrieved by demarcation proceedings carried out in Khasra No.509 situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Mamurpur, Narela, Delhi.
Learned counsel for respondent No.1/revenue authority/Government of NCT submits that till date, no representation has been received by the petitioner to the Government bodies. His additional submission is that the averment in the writ petition that demarcation has been carried out on 04.06.2015 is incorrect. He further submits that no demarcation was carried out on 04.06.2015 qua Khasra No.509. This Court has noted the submission of
respondent No.1. The private respondents are arrayed as respondent Nos.2 and 3 and submission of the private respondents owning land in Khasra Nos.496 and 497 and the alleged demarcation as pointed out by the petitioner should not be interfered in this land. This submission of respondent Nos.2 and 3 is also noted.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner candidly admits that he has made no representation to the revenue authorities.
This writ petition be treated as representation of the petitioner. No further orders are called for on this petition. It is disposed
of.
INDERMEET KAUR, J
AUGUST 01, 2016 gm
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to admit the writ petition as a representation for the deficiency in filing a representation.
Parveen Kumar
Government of NCT
Indermeet Kaur
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
