Disposed

Brij Bhushan Lal v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Delhi HC14 Jan 2019W.P.(C)/5684/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought directions to demolish illegal construction under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. The court issued a procedural direction regarding future service of status reports and disposed of the petition as infructuous after respondents reported sealing the property.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petition disposed of as infructuous.

Brij Bhushan Lal Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~59

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 5684/2018

¶4

BRIJ BHUSHAN LAL ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through Mr.Rakesh Tiwari with Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR.

¶8

..... Respondent

¶9

Through Mr.Kabir S.Ghosh, Adv for R-1. Mr.Abhinav Singh with Mr.Vinod & Mr.M.S.Kammal, Addl. Insp., Delhi Police.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

% 14.01.2019

¶13

Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to take action against the illegal construction in the area of Laddu Ghati, Paharganj, New Delhi-110055 as per the provisions of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957.

¶14

On 20.12.2018, the respondent no.1 had filed a status report pointing out that the respondents had initiated appropriate action in respect of the unauthorised constructions existing on property no. 5403, Laddu Ghati, Paharganj, New Delhi. A copy of the said status report was, however, not provided to the learned counsel for the petitioner and the same was filed with an endorsement “service not required”.

¶15

The Registry is directed to ensure that in the future, in all such matters where the grievance raised is regarding no action being taken by the respective Municipal Corporation in respect of unauthorised constructions, whenever a status report is filed, an advance copy thereof will be provided to the petitioner.

¶16

Today, Mr.Kabir Ghosh, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 submits that a vacation notice dated 10.01.2019 has already been issued to the occupant of the aforesaid property and upon his failure to vacate the same, the said property has been already sealed on 11.01.2019.

¶17

In view of the aforesaid statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent no.1, learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to press the present petition any further.

¶18

The petition is disposed of as infructuous.

¶19

REKHA PALLI, J

¶20

JANUARY 14, 2019

¶21

Brij Bhushan Lal v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brij Bhushan Lal v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ankush Ravindra Karwa Vs Union of India and Ors.

Amit Arora Vs Union of India and Ors.

Mahender Pratap Singh Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Cambridge School Vs the Commissioner of Police & Ors.

Abdul Wahid Vs Delhi Jal Board and Anr.

Rajkumari Gupta Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and Ors. Vs Sunita Kumari and Anr.

M/S Sriyash Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Anr.

Cambridge School Vs the Commissioner of Police & Ors.

Sh. Pradeep Rana Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Bhanu Bahsakr Noskar Vs Dredging International India Pvt. Ltd.

Bhura Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Mahesh Kumar Sharma Vs Sahara India Pariwar

Arun Kumar Bhatnagar Vs Delhi Devlopment Authority & Ors.