Petitioner challenged an order. Despite an alternative remedy existing, the Court declined to entertain the writ, relegating the petitioner to the remedy via ATMCD. Pending applications stood disposed.
Stay of respondent's proceedings for 10 days granted pending petitioner's recourse to alternative remedy; writ petition dismissed.
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.
$~84
Through: Mr.Atul Dewan, Adv.
versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Ms.Shivangi Kumar and Ms.Neha Rai, Advs for MCD.
CORAM:
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J SEPTEMBER 24, 2024/MJ
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 30/09/2024 at 12:54:26
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ be entertained in light of the existence of an alternative remedy before the Appellate Tribunal.
Aarti Devi
Municipal Corporation of Delhi
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
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
