Disposed

Jyoti Arora v. Lieutenant Governor, NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC3 Sept 2024W.P.(C)/16463/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A resident sought mandamus for road maintenance, closure of a road cut, control of stray cattle, scavenging, horticulture, lighting, CCTV coverage and relocation of utility poles at Shalimar Bagh. With respondents having taken steps shown in status reports, the court declined to issue continuing mandamus and disposed of the petition with liberty to approach the Executive Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of without directions; liberty granted to approach Executive Magistrate or file fresh representations to be dealt with in accordance with law.

Jyoti Arora Vs Lieutenant Governor, NCT of Delhi… — Municipal and Town Planning | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~26

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 16463/2022, CM APPL. 14891/2024

¶4

JYOTI ARORA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Niyati Razdan, Mr. Anand Singh Chauhan, Advs.

¶5

versus

¶6

LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondent Through: Ms. Avshrey A Pratap Singh Rudy, SPC, Ms. Usha Jamnal, Advs for R-3. Mr. Achal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Puneet Yadav, ASC for MCD. SI Harvir Singh, Ashok Vihar Traffic Circle. S.I. Joginder Singh, Parvi Officer Traffic.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R

¶9

% 03.09.2024

¶10

The petitioner in the instant writ petition has prayed for the following

¶11

reliefs:-

¶12

“A. Issue a mandamus directing the Respondent Nos.1-3 to take appropriation action in respect of the maintenance and cleanliness of the BT Block, Shalimar Bagh i.e.:

¶13

(i) Rectification of intersections, improvement of road markings, providing the roads with suitable signs, and correcting the operating cycles of traffic lights.

¶14

(ii) Close the road cut outside the State Bank of India (BT Block, Shalimar Bagh)

¶15

(iii) Take necessary steps to control the cow menace and stop the cows from leaving dung on the roads and littering the roads.

¶16

(iv) Utilise the government funds efficiently towards the development of cow shelters so as to ensure the proper maintenance of these animals as well as control the menace caused by them and keep a

¶17

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 06/09/2024 at 15:38:22

¶18

regular check on the population of these stray animals and also conduct periodic sterilization drive.

¶19

(v) Ensure regular scavenging of the streets, removal and disposal of the garbage and other obnoxious matters

¶20

(vi) Improve the horticulture done on this divider so as to maintain a healthy environment and enhance the lighting of the area so as to ensure the safety of the pedestrians as well as the cyclists commuting. (vii) Installation of CCTV cameras covering every road as well as setting up of barricades, towards the safety and security of the Petitioner as well as other residents of the block.

¶21

B. Issue a mandamus directing the Respondent No.4 to shift the poles from the front of the residences to street corners or outside commercial openings such as banks, shops etc. where there is sufficient space available and that the loosely low hanging wires to be concealed in ducts and removed from hanging at balcony level.

¶22

C. Pass any other appropriate order/direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and appropriate.”

¶23

On notice being issued, the status report came to be filed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi on 13.04.2023. It has been brought on record that the Veterinary Services Department, Keshavpuram Zone, has conducted numerous cattle catching operations in the area affected by cow menace and its vicinity at Shalimar Bagh residential colony and various steps were taken to address the grievance raised in the instant writ petition. Paragraph nos.3 to 6 of the status report reads as under:-

¶24

“3. It is respectfully submitted that the Veterinary Services Department Keshavpuram Zone has conducted numerous cattle catching operations in the area affected y cow menace & its vicinity at Shalimar Bagh residential colony and during the period from 01.12.2022 to 12.04.2023 impounded 56 nos. of stray cattle of illegal dairies owners of adjoining singalpur village operating from Western Yamuna Canal (Haryana Canal) and responsible for this menace. It is further submitted that the department has also prosecuted under DMC Act 1957 against these illegal dairy owners and 43 nos. of prosecutions have been done during the period from 1.12.2022 to 12.04.2023.

¶25

4. It is respectfully submitted that in compliance of the orders dated

¶26

¶27

16.12.2002 passed by this Hon'ble Court, Coordination Committee comprising of Deputy Commissioner of the Corporation (Keshavpuram Zone) and Deputy Commissioner of Police of concerned district in its recently held meeting on dated 20.12.2022 decided that removal of encroachment on account of illegal dairy etc on any Govt. land/DDA land/Irrigation and Flood control etc, is primarily the responsibility of land owning agency/concerned department which should get encroachment removed with the help of police. In the instant matter, the land owning agency where the illegal dairies are being operated at Western Yamuna Canal (Haryana Canal) and responsible for creating cow menace at the site of petitioner and its vicinity is Haryana Irrigation Department, Govt of Haryana which has been requested vide letter No. 496/DDVS/KPZ/2023 dated 10.4.2023 for conducting a joint survey of the illegal dairies operating at Haryana Canal and then take a joint action for removal of encroachments of illegal dairies from this site. A copy of the letter sent in this regard to Executive Engineer, Haryana Irrigation Department is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE -'A'.

¶28

5. It is further submitted that apart from above, the Electricity Distribution Company, TPDDL has also been requested vide this office letter No. 495 DDVS/ KPZ/ 2023 dated 10.4.2023 for disconnection of electricity connections supplying electricity to the illegal dairies operating at Western Yamuna Canal (Haryana Canal). A copy of the letter sent in this regard to the Manager, Revenue Recovery Group(RRG), TPDDL Keshavpuram, Delhi is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-'B'.

¶29

6. That in compliance of orders dated 16.12.2002 passed in WP(C) 3791/2000 common cause society Vs UOI & ors, the SHO/PS, Shalimar Bagh has been requested vide this office letters sent on 27.2.2023 and reminders sent on 12.4.2023 to prosecute the responsible illegal dairies owners u/s 289 IPC & 98 of DP Act. It is submitted that DPCC has also been requested vide letter No. 506/DDVS/KPZ/2023 dated 12.4.2023 to take action against these illegal dairies owners under Environment Protection Act-1986. A copy of the letter sent in this regard to the Senior Environmental Engineer, CMC-III is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE 'C'.”

¶30

It is also seen that on 17.04.2023, another status report came to be filed by respondent no.4, wherein, certain averments have been made with respect to implementation of various regulations of the Central Electricity

¶31

¶32

Authority (Measures relating to Safety and Electric Supply) Regulations, 2010.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for the said respondent further submits that the condition of the apparatus save as mentioned in the status report is not attributable to respondent no.4 herein.

¶34

It also appears that the Public Works Department (PWD) has placed on record short affidavit dated 26.09.2023, wherein, it has been stated that certain steps are being taken for construction of RCC Crash Barriers to mitigate the grievance put forth in the instant writ petition. Paragraphs nos.4 to 6 of the short affidavit filed by the PWD reads as under:

¶35

“4.It is also submitted that the existing road cut outside the State Bank of India, BT Block, Shalimar Bagh is opened and closed as per the requirements and/or instructions of Traffic Police so as to avoid congestion and traffic issues. However, efforts are undertaken so as to avoid the unnecessary movement of cattle.

¶36

5. It is further submitted that the estimate for construction of RCC crash barrier has already been submitted on 11.05.2023 for getting the necessary administrative approval & expenditure sanctions, and the necessary works will be executed after obtaining the same.

¶37

6. Further, a letter dated 18.09.2023 has been received from Traffic Inspector, Ashok Vihar, asking for directions to be passed to the concerned officials to install jersey barriers according to Indian Roads Congress (IRC) guidelines to close the above mentioned road cut. The necessary works in this regard will be executed after obtaining necessary administrative approval & expenditure sanctions.”

¶38

It further appears that on 06.10.2023, SHO, P.S. Shalimar Bagh has also placed on record his status report indicating the progress of the FIR No.1075/2021 registered on 16.12.2021 for offences under Section 392/394/411/34 IPC.

¶39

¶40

Having considered the nature of the controversy involved in the instant writ petition and various steps being taken by the official respondents, the Court is of the considered opinion that monitoring of the controversy at hand would require constant oversight of the matter and thus, the Court would be required to exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a continuing mandamus. Under the facts of the present case, such an exercise of power may not be required in view of availability of various other forums for agitating the grievance herein.

¶41

This Court, vide order dated 12.08.2024 in W.P.(C) 4562/2018 titled as Ajay v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation Through Its Commissioner , has considered the circumstances as to when the Court may require invoking its extraordinary jurisdiction to issue a continuing mandamus. Paragraph nos.13 to 15 of the reads as under:-

¶42

“13. Recently, this Court vide order dated 29.07.2024 in W.P. (C) 4206/2024 titled as Jangpura Extension Residents Forum RWA v. Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board & Ors., while dismissing a petition seeking continuing mandamus has held as under:-

¶43

"6. It is well-established that while the Court is vested with extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the essence of the remedy of continuing mandamus lies in eliminating the uncertainties of adjudication. This remedy empowers courts to supervise, superintend, and intervene to actualize specific socio-economic rights and rectify administrative non-compliance.

¶44

7. Examining the prevailing jurisprudence, the remedy of continuing mandamus is invoked exclusively in exceptional circumstances where persistent executive recalcitrance obstructs the delivery of justice. In such instances, judicial follow-up becomes imperative in accordance with the Court’s constitutional and moral obligations to uphold the rule of law. 8. In the present case, the respondent-MCD has taken adequate

¶45

¶46

actions and has demonstrated compliance through Status Report, to which the petitioner has not raised any objections. Therefore, the Court is of the considered opinion that the facts and circumstances of this case do not warrant the issuance of a continuing mandamus, as the respondent's conduct has remained within the scope of their statutory duties and in compliance with the directions of this Court."

¶47

14. In any case, if the petitioner has any further grievance, he is always entitled to take up appropriate proceedings under the provisions of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or may file a civil suit against the private respondents. Besides that, there exists a Special Task Force constituted as per the directions of the Supreme Court. The petitioner can very well approach the STF as well.

¶48

15. The Court, at this stage, does not find any grave violation of any extant rules and regulations and more so, nothing to that effect has been pointed out by the petitioner.”

¶49

However, looking at the nature of the grievance raised by the petitioner, the Court grants liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned Executive Magistrate under Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 or to approach the concerned official respondent by way of filing a fresh representation. In case the petitioner avails any such recourse, the respective authorities are under an obligation to deal with the same strictly in accordance with law. At this stage, no further directions are required to be passed.

¶50

Accordingly, the instant petition stands disposed of.

¶51

All rights and contentions are left open.

¶52

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.

¶53

SEPTEMBER 3, 2024/KG

¶54

This is a digitally signed order.

¶55

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 06/09/2024 at 15:38:22

Jyoti Arora v. Lieutenant Governor, NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyoti Arora v. Lieutenant Governor, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

National Power Training Institute Vs Office of Chief Commissioner for Persons With Disability & Ors.

M/S Microsoft India R and D Pvt. Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -4 & Anr.

Smart Cube India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 22(2)

W.C Nanda and Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

M C Mittal Vs the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Ruchika Jain & Anr. Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sh. Sumat Prasad Jain & Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT Delhi & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. Vs Ex Nk Mohan Singh

W.C Nanda and Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Parvinder Singh Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Punjab National Bank Vs Dr R K Gupta

Anita Jain Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Ramesh Chand Gupta Vs MCD & Ors.

M/S Keya Foods Vs Union of India & Ors.