Disposed
Mohan Singh v. South Delhi Municipal Council and Anr.
Delhi HCW.P.(C)/6677/2016
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C)…
What the court decided
AI extract
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.
$~2
versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ANR ..... Respondents Through Ms. Reema Khurana, Advocate for SDMC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 05.12.2016
CM.APPL 42497/2016(delay)
For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 24 days in filing of the application for restoration of the petition is condoned
The application stands disposed of.
CM.APPL 42496/2016(restoration)
By the present application, the petitioner seeks restoration of the writ petition which was dismissed for non-appearance on 01.08.2016.
Notice. Ms. Reema Khurana, counsel for the SDMC accepts notice.
The prayer made in this application is not opposed. Accordingly, the order dated 01.08.2016 is recalled. Writ petition is restored to its original number and file.
The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 6677/2016
The petitioner claims that a tehbazari site was allotted to his father Late Sh. Kishori Lal way back in the year 1978. Sh. Kishori Lal is stated to have been vending at Shop No.16, Sitla Mata Market, Madan Gir, New Delhi. Petition also discloses that the father of the petitioner died on 20.03.1993. Petitioner claims that upon death of his father, his mother continued to vend at
the site. A copy of the challan dated 17.08.1996 has been placed on record. Learned counsel submits that the mother of the petitioner also died on 02.01.2008. Thereafter, sister of the petitioner Susheela Devi joined the younger brother of the petitioner and continued to carry out their business from afore-stated shop. Unfortunately, on 05.08.2012, the sister of the petitioner also died.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner made an application and also issued a legal notice to the respondent praying that the site in question may be allotted in his favour upon death of his father-mother/sister.
Ms. Reema Khurana, learned counsel for the SDMC, who enters appearance on an advance copy, submits that the averments made in the writ petition are factually incorrect. She submits that no tehbazari licence was granted in favour of the father of the petitioner. She submits that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner and subject to legal pleas, in case an application for mutation is moved by the petitioner, the same shall be considered in accordance with law.
Let the application, if not filed, be filed within four weeks from today. In case such an application is filed, the same shall be disposed of within eight weeks.
The writ petition stands disposed of, as prayed by the counsel for the petitioner.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SUNITA GUPTA, J
DECEMBER 05, 2016/ pst /
W.P.(C) 6677/2016
2/2
Mohan Singh
South Delhi Municipal Council
G.S. Sistani
Sunita Gupta
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