Petitioner challenged encroachment actions by SDMC. Court noted action had already been taken and disposed of the petition without adjudication on merits.
No further adjudication required; petition 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.
$~9
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
%
O R D E R 17.11.2017
W.P.(C) No.10174/2016
Pg.1 of 3
Vakalatnama of Mr. Bahar U. Barqi, Advocate is accordingly discharged.
Mr. Pawan K. Bahl, learned counsel for the private respondent Nos.5 and 6 strongly contest the legality of the action taken by the South Delhi Municipal Corporation.
It is submitted that this order has been passed in respect of the properties of the petitioner and that the SDMC is required to proceed in the matter in accordance with law. 5. It cannot be disputed that the Municipal Corporations are required to ensure that all constructions are in accordance with law. W.P.(C) No.10174/2016 Pg.2 of 3
Pg.2 of 3
Inasmuch as action already stands taken so far as properties in the complaint made by the petitioner is concerned, this writ petition does not need any further adjudication by us.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
NOVEMBER 17, 2017 /pmc
W.P.(C) No.10174/2016
Pg.3 of 3
Rachna Sahni
South Delhi Municipal Corporation
C HARI SHANKAR
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
