Single judge Delhi HC dismissed a writ petition seeking rehabilitation plots due to unexplained delay of two decades, citing Pepsu RTC precedent.
Writ petition and underlying application dismissed due to delay and laches.
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.
HIRENDRA GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Versus
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R (ORAL)
W.P.(C) 1460/2017
Page 1 of 2
property in the aforesaid Will relied upon by petitioner. It is also submitted by learned counsel for respondent-DDA that this petition is not only hit by delay and laches, but is also misconceived.
(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE
AUGUST 14, 2018 s
W.P.(C) 1460/2017
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed due to unexplained delay and laches.
Whether application filed in 1983 and 2011 requires satisfactory explanation for two decades delay.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pepsu RTC v. S.K. SharmaApplied¶15
Pepsu RTC v. S.K. Sharma, (2016) 9 SCC 206 · Who else cites this
Harendra Gupta
Land & Building Department
Sunil Gaur
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
