In a contempt petition for inaction regarding unauthorized construction, the court noted the petitioner's absence and the respondent's affidavit confirming the demolition of the structure, thereby closing the petition.
Contempt petition closed; petitioner directed to revive the petition if still aggrieved by inaction.
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.
$~6
versus
DEEVESH SINGH ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Mansi Gupta, Adv.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO O R D E R % 02.04.2018
I note there is no appearance for the petitioner even on the second call. Ms. Mansi Gupta, learned counsel appearing fo the respondent / North Delhi Municipal Corporation has drawn my attention to the status report filed by the respondent, paras 3 and 4 of the status report reads as under:
“3. That the deponent submits that the records maintained by the Building Deptt. CSPZ, has been requisitioned and on perusal of the same, it reveal that the unauthorized construction at 3rd floor has been carrid out at the instance of Sh. Lokesh and Sh. Nitin Jain without any permission / sanction from the Corporation which was booked vide u/c File No. 76/B/UC/SPZ/2017 and 28/03/2017 under Section 343/344 of the DMC Act 1957. After following due process of law, the demolition order dated 18/04/2017 was passed as per the policy. The photocopy of the demolition order is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE R-1.
4. That the deponent further states that steps to execute the demoltion order were intitiated on 26/04/2017 but due to shortage of time action could not be taken. However, another
demoltion/sealing programmes were fixed for execution of the demolition orders at Prop. No. 5484, Budhia Ki Sarai, Dharamveer Ashram, Gandhi Market, Sadar Bazaar, Delhi within the jurisdciton of P.S. Sadar Bazaar, Delhi on 16.05.2017, 08/06/2017 and 30/08/2017. On availability of the Police Force, the booked unauthorized construction at 3rd Floor, in the form of Roof and Tin Shed has been comjpletely demolished and made unusable on the aforesaid three attempts of demoltion made by the Corporation. The current photographs of the Premises in question are annexed herewith as Annexure R-2 Colly.”
She has drawn my attention to photograph at Page 4 of the status report. She reiterates the stand taken in the status report in her submissions as well. In view of the status report and the fact that there is no appearance for the petitioner even on the second call, the contempt petition is closed.
If the petitioner is still aggrieved by any inaction on the part of the respondent, he shall be at liberty to revive the contempt petition.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
APRIL 02, 2018 /jg
1 provisions across 1 enactments
HARJEET SINGH
DEEVESH SINGH
V. KAMESWAR RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Proceedings for wilful disobedience of a court order under the Contempt of Courts Act 1971.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
