Disposed

Sh. Mahesh Yadav and Ors. v. New Delhi Municipal Council

Delhi HC7 Dec 2018W.P.(C)/13203/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition without expressing an opinion on merits. It issued agreed directions for the petitioners to approach the Town Vending Committee and noted that absence at the time of survey is not grounds for rejection.

What did the court decide?

No opinion on merits expressed. Commission formed. Petitioners to file at httppetitioners.

Sh. Mahesh Yadav and Ors. Vs New Delhi Municipal Council — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~8

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 13203/2018 & CM APPL. 51261/2018

¶4

SH. MAHESH YADAV AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.R.N.Singh and Mr.Anand Shailani, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL ..... Respondent Through: Mr.D.S.Mehandru, ASC with Mr.T.S.Dahiya and Mr.Tushar Sannu, Advocates.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH O R D E R

¶9

% 07.12.2018

¶10

CM.APPL. 51262/2018 (exemption)

¶11

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

The application stands disposed of.

¶13

W.P.(C) 13203/2018 & CM APPL. 51261/2018

¶14

Present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioners. The petitioners claim to be squatting at the places (mentioned in the memo of parties), Sarojini Nagar Market, New Delhi. It is submitted that although the petitioners have been carrying out their vending activities, they are being harassed by the officials of the respondents.

¶15

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, at this stage, submits that since the Town Vending Committee (TVC) has been constituted, the petitioners would approach the TVC with all supporting documents and, if

¶16

for any reason, the petitioners are not found squatting at the time of survey, that alone should not be a ground to reject their case.

¶17

Learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent /New Delhi Municipal Council without admitting any of the averments made in the writ petition, submits that should the petitioners make an application with all supporting documents before the TVC, the same would be considered in accordance with law and merely because the petitioners are not found squatting, that itself alone would not be a ground to reject the case of the petitioners.

¶18

Resultantly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following agreed directions:-

¶19

(i) The petitioners will approach the TVC with all supporting documents; and

¶20

(ii) The TVC will consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with law and merely because the petitioners are not found vending at the site at the time of survey, that by itself would not be a ground alone to reject their case.

¶21

We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

¶22

The writ petition stands disposed of, in above terms.

G.S.SISTANI, J

JYOTI SINGH, J

ssc

W.P.(C) 13203/2018

¶27

Page 2 of 2

¶28

DECEMBER 07, 2018

Sh. Mahesh Yadav and Ors. v. New Delhi Municipal Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sh. Mahesh Yadav and Ors. v. New Delhi Municipal Council

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Delhi Transport Corporation through Its Chairman Vs Anil Kumar

South Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs Lekh Raj and Anr.

South Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs Ganga Saran & Ors.

South Delhi Municipal Corporation Vs Ram Chander & Anr.

B. K. Tripathi Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kanijan & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Indian Wind Power Association Vs Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Power and Ors.

Mgmt. of Cantonment Board Merr Vs Preetam Singh

Yashoda Devi Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation

Manmohan Sharma & Ors. Vs New Delhi Municipal Council (Ndmc) & Anr.

Parul Nahar Vs Soumitra Kumar Nahar

Ghanshyam Madan Vs Karamveer Singh Narwal

Pooja Singh Vs Ajit Pal Singh

M/S the 3 R Technologies Vs Union of Inida & Ors.