Writ petitions challenging allocation of shops were dismissed as not pressed after petitioners were allotted shops 107 and 108.
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.
$~55 & 56
versus
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ORS. ..... Respondents
versus
NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Present : Mr. Vishal Raj Sehijpal with Mr. Sunil Sagar, Advocates for petitioners in both items.
Mr. Sri Harsha Peechara, Standing Counsel for NDMC with
Mr.Mohd. Faizal, AI in both items. Mr. Prabhsahay Kaur, Advocate for GNCTD in item no.55.
Mr. Jyoti Taneja, Advocate for GNCTD in item no.56.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
O R D E R
% 08.05.2018
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the grievance of the
petitioners has been redressed and petitioners have been allotted shops no.107 and 108.
Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed as not pressed. Photographs showing handing over of the possession have been submitted in Court, which shall form part of the Court record.
CM APPLs 10188/2018 & 10189/2018 in W.P.(C) 2450/2018 CM APPLs 10217/2018 & 10218/2018 in W.P.(C) 2457/2018
The applications stand disposed of in view of the order passed in the writ petitions.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
MAY 08, 2018/ ck/
Maduri Devi @ Mathuri Devi
Murari Lal
New Delhi Municipal Council
G.S. Sistani
Sangita Dhingra Sehgal
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
