Disposed

Confederation of Ncr Residents Welfare Associations (Regd.) & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC1 Feb 2024W.P.(C)/10333/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Acting Chief Justice disposed of a Public Interest Litigation challenging a Memorandum of Understanding and Concession Agreement for the Delhi Noida Bridge Project. The Court held that no further directions were merited as the issues were already being considered by the Supreme Court and various tribunals. Allegations of criminal offences were left open for separate proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The Petition and pending applications stand disposed of as no further directions are merited.

Confederation of Ncr Residents Welfare… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

+ W.P.(C) 10333/2015, CM APPL. 25760/2015, CM APPL. 20419/2016, CM APPL. 26316/2016 & CM APPL. 38340/2019

¶4

CONFEDERATION OF NCR RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATIONS (REGD.) & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Amit Khemka, Advocate with Ms. Tavi Agarwal, Advocate versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, SC for GNCTD with Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC for Respondent No.2. Mr. Raunak Dhilon, Advocate with Ms. Madavi Khanna and Mr. Nihaad Dewan, Advocates for respondent No.6. Mr. Rachil Mittal, Advocate % Date of Decision: 1^st February, 2024

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

¶7

J U D G M E N T

¶8

MANMOHAN, ACJ: (ORAL)

¶9

Present Public Interest Litigation (‘PIL’) was filed on 31^st October, 2015, seeking quashing of the Memorandum of Understanding (‘MoU’) dated 07^th April, 1992, Concession Agreement dated 12^th November, 1997, Support Agreement dated 14^th January, 1998, and all other consequential

¶10

Signature Not Verified

¶11

W.P.(C) 10333/2015

¶12

Page 1 of 3

¶13

Digitally Signed By:Rashmi Dabas Signing Da te:0 2.02.2024 15:55:00

¶14

permission granted to Respondent No. 6 for construction and operation of the Delhi Noida Bridge Project known as DND flyover.

¶15

It is a matter of record that in a separate PIL bearing no. 60214/2012 filed before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, on comprehensively similar issues, the said High Court by its judgment dated 26^th October, 2016, has issued directions, inter-alia, restraining Respondent No. 6 from recovering any user fees or toll from the commuters using the DND flyover. The said judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad has been impugned and is pending consideration before the Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No. 33403/2016.

¶16

Further, Respondent No. 6 has averred in CM APPL. No. 38340/2019 that an investigation by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (‘SFIO’) has already been ordered into the affairs of Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 in the year 2018. It is also stated in the said application that the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai (‘NCLT’), has already admitted a petition under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, against Respondent No. 5 at the instance of Union of India and reconstituted the Board of Directors of Respondent No. 5. Further, there are proceedings pending before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (‘NCLAT’) pertaining to Respondent No. 6.

¶17

At this stage, learned counsel for the Petitioners states that there was a nexus between various officers of NCT of Delhi, Government of India and that of the State of Uttar Pradesh with some of the private foreign entities for their mutual benefit at the cost of public exchequer under the garb of public private partnership. He states that criminal offences have been committed and the matter requires investigation.

¶18

Signature Not Verified

¶19

W.P.(C) 10333/2015

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

Digitally Signed By:Rashmi Dabas Signing Da te:0 2.02.2024 15:55:00

¶22

This Court is of the view that if the Petitioners is of the opinion that criminal offences have been committed, it is open to it to file proceedings in accordance with law. It is however clarified that this Court has not examined the merits of the said allegations made by the Petitioners and proceedings, if initiated, shall be decided in accordance with law.

¶23

In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the opinion that no further directions in furtherance of the reliefs sought in this PIL are merited especially, in view of the fact that the Supreme Court and various legal forums including special Tribunals are already considering the issues raised in the present petition. Accordingly, the present petition and pending applications stand disposed of.

¶24

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶25

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J

¶26

FEBRUARY 1, 2024/hp/aa

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

W.P.(C) 10333/2015

¶29

Page 3 of 3

¶30

Digitally Signed By:Rashmi Dabas Signing Da te:0 2.02.2024 15:55:00

Confederation of Ncr Residents Welfare Associations (Regd.) & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Confederation of Ncr Residents Welfare Associations (Regd.) & Ors. v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radhika Sharma through Her Father Vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University and Ors.

Rekha Singh Vs Ndmc & Anr.

Ravneet Singh Kohli Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ajay Vs Ndmc & Anr.

Delhi Public School Mathura Road Vs Union of India and Anr.

Meenakshi Singh Vs Gnct of Delhi and Ors.

Ashok Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Mohd Wasim Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Manish Rachhoy a Vs Kamal Kant Rachhoya

Apeejay Education Society Regd. & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Ors.

M/S Advance Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Gail (India) Limited

Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Vs Nema as Guardian of Raj

Akarshan Bhawan Flat Owners Welfare Association Akarshan Bhavan and Another Vs Sushil Kumar Jain and Others

Pawan Kumar Aggarwal Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.