Dismissed

Nyayabhoomi v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC14 Jan 2019W.P.(C)/6224/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation filed by Nyayabhoomi seeking construction of common cab-ranks and equal treatment for various taxi permits. The court held that since the petitioner is a taxi operator, a PIL is not maintainable and refused to interfere.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition and pending applications were dismissed as not maintainable.

Nyayabhoomi Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~24

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 6224/2018 & CM APPLs. 24037/2018 & 42864/2018 NYAYABHOOMI ..... Petitioner Through: Petitioner in person. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ramesh Singh, Standing Counsel (Civil), GNCTD with Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, Adv. for GNCTD with Mr. Rajesh Kumar, MLO (Transport). Mr. Manish Jorwal, ACP/Traffic/HQ. Insp. Suraj Bhan, TI/Legal Cell. SI Ram Tirath, Pairvi Officer, Traffic.

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

¶5

O R D E R % 14.01.2019

¶6

W.P.(C) 6224/2018 & CM APPL. 24037/2018

¶7

This petition in public interest has been filed by the petitioner Nyayabhoomi through its Secretary Shri Rakesh Aggarwal and the prayer made in the writ petition is primarily to construct common cab-ranks for autorickshaws and taxis wherever feasible, give equal treatment without discrimination to taxis holding tourist permits, city taxi permits and black and yellow taxi permits and various other reliefs with regard to parking rules, issuance of benefits to city taxi permit holders and various other issues connected thereto.

¶8

Respondents raise a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the petition and point out that the petitioner Shri Rakesh W.P.(C) 6224/2018 Page 1 of 2

¶9

Aggarwal is founder and CEO of an establishment named and styled “M/s SEWA Cab” which is involved in carrying out various businesses of taxi and cab services, is an interested person and therefore Public Interest Litigation under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at the instance of the petitioner is not maintainable. They invite out attention to certain communications made to the petitioner as founder and CEO of “M/s SEWA Cab” by the airport authorities with regard to representation submitted by the petitioner making claim for extending prepaid facility to various taxis and cabs and for providing or imposing restrictions on passengers to make use of any particular taxi operator of their choice.

¶10

Taking note of the fact that petitioner himself is a taxi cab operator through his establishment “M/s SEWA Cab” at the instance of the petitioner in a Public Interest Litigation, we are not inclined to interfere into the matter.

¶11

The writ petition is therefore dismissed. The pending application also stands disposed of.

¶12

CM APPL. 42864/2018

¶13

Dismissed being infructuous.

¶14

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶15

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

¶16

JANUARY 14, 2019 kks

¶17

W.P.(C) 6224/2018

¶18

Page 2 of 2

Nyayabhoomi v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nyayabhoomi v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

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.

The Indian Newspaper Society & Anr. Vs the Chairman Press Council of India & Ors.

Radhey Shyam Vs Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

Sagar Sharma and Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Asha & Ors. Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sushil Gahlot Vs Mohinder Singh & Ors.

Rms Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Proactive Universal Trading Co. Ltd. & Anr.