The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking removal of a mobile tower under Article 226 of the Constitution for default due to the petitioner's failure to appear and deposit costs as directed in a previous order.
The petition is dismissed for default.
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.
$~12
MR. RAJ KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: None.
versus
SDMC AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Puja Kalra, SC for MCD.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
O R D E R % 01.10.2024
“1. Ms. Mumtaz Ahmad, learned counsel appears on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner was unrepresented on the last two dates of
Page 1 of 2
W.P.(C) 13429/2018
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/10/2024 at 11:53:58
hearing i.e., 21.04.2022 and 24.03.2023. Learned counsel states that she was not appearing as she had no instructions on behalf of the petitioner, but the petitioner contacted her yesterday, instructing her to appear today.
2. This is not a satisfactory state of affairs. Ms. Mumtaz Ahamad is the counsel who has filed the present petition. It is expected that learned counsel on record will appear before the Court and apprise the Court of the status of the matter, whether or not they have been instructed to appear on a particular date. Even today, learned counsel does not have instructions.
3. Adjournment is therefore granted at the request of learned counsel, subject to deposit of costs of Rs.10,000/- with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee [UCO Bank, Delhi High Court, Shershah Road, New Delhi, Account No. 15530110008386, IFSC CodeUCBA0001553] within two weeks from today.
4. List on 19.01.2024.”
PRATEEK JALAN, J
OCTOBER 1, 2024 ‘Bhupi’/
Page 2 of 2
W.P.(C) 13429/2018
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/10/2024 at 11:53:58
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sh. Jai Prakash Gupta vs. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.Referred¶10
Sh. Jai Prakash Gupta vs. North Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors. [order dated 11.04.2023 in W.P.(C) 3113/2022]
Mr. Raj Kumar
SDMC and Ors.
Prateek Jain
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
Prateek Jain
Parties & counsel
