Dismissed

Sumant Sharma and Ors. v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board and Ors.

Delhi HC20 Aug 2018W.P.(C)/2345/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special leave petition declared an abuse of process of court and dismissed. The court held that the petitioners are children of parties in a previously dismissed writ petition challenging the same hutments, constituting a ruse to re-agitate resolved matters.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as abuse of process. Pending application disposed of.

Sumant Sharma and Ors. Vs Delhi Urban Shelter… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~21

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 2345/2018 & CM APPL. NO. 9871/2018

¶4

SUMANT SHARMA AND ORS. ..... Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Sanjay Beniwal & Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD AND ORS.

¶8

..... Respondents

¶9

Through: Mr. Sumeet Pushkarna, Advocate with Mr. Gulshan, JE, DJB Mr. Rishikesh Kumar, ASC with Mr. Premsagar Pal, Advocates for R-3-4

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R % 20.08.2018

¶11

The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia , praying as under:

¶12

“A) For a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to conduct a survey to determine the number of households and especially distinct households of the petitioners in Jhuggie Cluster near Y-90, T Huts, Block Y, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 16.

¶13

B) Pass an order setting aside or quashing the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015 issued by DELHI URBAN SHELTER IMPROVEMENT BOARD, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI to the extent whereby it only makes eligible J J Basti (Jhuggie Jhopri

¶14

Bastis) meaning thereby only those slum clusters where at least 50 House Holds exist are eligible to be rehabilitated by the DUSIB, and modify it to the extent that even smaller clusters of slums are eligible for rehabilitation.

¶15

C) For a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents restraining them from demolishing any of the homes of the petitioners herein residing in Jhuggie Cluster near Y-90, T Huts, Block Y, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 16.

¶16

D)For an order directing the respondents to disclose the ownership of the land on which Jhuggie Cluster near Y- 90, T Huts, Block Y, Hauz Khas, New Delhi 16 is situated, and to produce the entire file showing the making of orders by the authorities for the demolition of the slums;

¶17

E) For an order directing the respondent No. 1 to Show the Compliance of the Delhi government order under the signature of Principal Secretary (UD) Government of NCT of Delhi vide F No. PPS/Secy/UD/2015/ Seynd/3650 dated 16.02.2015 before issuing the public notice.

¶18

F) Pass an order directing Respondents to cease any further evictions or harassment of residents that live in the abovementioned area until all appropriate rehabilitation has been provided.

¶19

G) Pass an order restricting the officers/employees/agents of respondent No. 1 & 4 from giving false threat to the residents of the abovementioned slum cluster.”

¶20

The petitioners claim to be residents of hutments (Jhuggis) located near Y-90, T-huts, Block Y, Hauz Khas, New Delhi-110016.

¶21

It is pointed out that the original occupants of the said hutments had filed a writ petition – W.P.(C) 5130/2015 captioned as Shanta Prasad & Ors. vs. Delhi Jal Board & Ors . The said writ petition was dismissed as it was found that the petitioners (therein) had no right to occupy the land in question. It was further noticed that the petitioner Nos. 1 to 5 therein were erstwhile employees of Delhi Jal Board and had also drawn House Rent Allowance from Delhi Jal Board.

¶22

It is not controverted that the petitioners in the present case are the children of the petitioners that had approach the Court in that petition and the hutments (JJs) in question are the same as were the subject matter of that petition. This petition is an abuse of the process of the courts and a ruse to re-agitate the issue that were subject matter of the earlier petition.

¶23

In view of the above, the present petition is unmerited and is accordingly dismissed. The pending application is also disposed of.

¶24

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

¶25

AUGUST 20, 2018 rd

Sumant Sharma and Ors. v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumant Sharma and Ors. v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit Paul Vs Union of India & Ors.

B.S.N.L. and Ors. Vs Ram Pratap and Anr.

Tanishq Gangwar & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mukesh Devi Yadav Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sushil Kumar Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Sujata Kohli Vs Registrar General, High Court of Delhi & Ors.

Sunil Kumar Aledia Vs Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board.

Baptist Church Trust Association Vs the Secretary, Government of India & Ors.

Mukesh Devi Yadav Vs Union of India and Ors.

Minakshi Maheshwari Vs Union of India and Ors.

Mohd. Mudaser Ahmadi Vs the Regional Passport Officer and Anr.

All About Outdoor Media.Com. Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation and 0RS.

All India Institute of Medical Sciences Vs Sobuhi Iqbal

Chaman Lal Arora Vs the Official Liquidator and Ors.