A petitioner raised unhearing concerns and apprehensions regarding a toilet block construction by DMRC, leading the court to dispose of the application as no further orders were deemed required.
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.
$~2
TARUN PAL SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through Mr Manish Kaushik, Mr Mishal Johari, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through Mr Ajay Digpaul, CGSC for UOI. Mr Ankur Gupta, Advocate for DMRC. Mr Anya Singh, Advocate for GNCTD R2. Mr Tushar Sannu, Mr Ankit Jain, Advocate for SDMC.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R
% 04.07.2018
CM 25397/2018
be kept in a clean state and would hamper access to its land. Clearly, DMRC would be required to ensure that the toilet block and its immediate surroundings are maintained in a clean and hygienic state. It is expected that DMRC would maintain the requisite standards of cleanliness. If DMRC fails to do so, it will be open for the petitioner to seek appropriate remedies.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
JULY 04, 2018 pkv
TARUN PAL SINGH
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
VIBHU BAKHRU
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
