Writ petitioner challenged a notice for encroachment removal. Court deferred interference pending SDM consideration of petitioner's representation and directed verification of road width.
Exemption from removal action allowed pending consideration of representation; SDM directed to verify documents regarding road width.
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.
$~26
MANGAL SINGH AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr Vivek Singh and Mr Manish Arora, Advocates.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr Ashim Sood, CGSC with Mr Dhruv Sood, Ms Payal Chandra and Mr Rhythm Buaria, Advocates for R- 1. Mr Santosh Kumar Tripathi, ASC, GNCTD with Mr Shashank for R-3. Ms Puja Kalra, Advocate for R- 4/SDMC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R % 09.02.2018
CM No. 5077/2018
W.P.(C) 1222/2018 and CM No. 5076/2018
documents available with the PWD to ascertain whether the width of road is 60 feet.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
FEBRUARY 09, 2018 RK
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the notice issued for removal of encroachment pending consideration of the petitioner's representation by the SDM.
Whether the petitioner is directed to verify documents to ascertain the actual width of the road in question.
Mangal Singh
Union of India
Government of NCT of Delhi
Vibhu Bakhu
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
