The Single Judge dismissed the petitioner's petition for renewal of a railway station catering license. The writing found the matter unresisted upon a prayer to withdraw the petition, and consequently dismissed it as withdrawn.
Permission was granted to withdraw the writ petition unconditionally; the petition was dismissed accordingly.
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.
$~37
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Viplav Acharya, Senior Panel Counsel for UOI with Ms. Laavanya Kaushik, Govt. Pleader, UOI.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
O R D E R % 17.12.2024
“ 1. Present letters patent appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 16th July, 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) 9231/2024, whereby the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the letter dated 13th September, 2023, issued by respondent no.5 was dismissed. Vide letter dated 13th September,
Page 1 of 3
W.P.(C) 17294/2024
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 19/12/2024 at 13:07:40
2023, respondent no. 5 had extended the catering stall license of the appellant by seventy days for dies-non period.
2. After some arguments, learned counsel for the appellant seeks parity with petitioners in W.P.(C) 6771/2024 titled as Ved Prakash Mishra vs. Union of India & Ors., wherein the writ petition was dismissed but three months’ extension was granted to the petitioners for vacating their stalls.
3. Though learned counsel for the respondents, who appears on advance notice, opposes the grant of extension on the ground that the appellant petitioner had approached this Court at the eleventh hour and that too, after taking the benefit of seventy days for dies-non period, yet this Court is of the view that as similarly placed minor catering units have been granted extension of time of three months to vacate, the appellant-petitioner is also entitled to the same.
4. Accordingly, the present appeal along with the applications is disposed of giving three month’s time to the appellant-petitioner from 19th July, 2024 to vacate her catering stall in question. In the event, the said catering stall is not removed on the expiry of extended ninety days, the respondents shall be at liberty to forthwith remove the goods of the appellant/petitioner, without filing any petition. ”
“ 1. I say that I am the Appellant in the present matter and am competent to sign and file the present undertaking. I state that I am aware of the facts of the case and am competent to declare this affidavit.
Page 2 of 3
W.P.(C) 17294/2024
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 19/12/2024 at 13:07:40
2. I say that I had filed the SLP(Civil) No. 23728 of 2024 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India for provision of Catering Services for SMU Catering Stall located at UDHNA Railway Station on Platform No. 2/3 (New Location) near pole no. 18 south side of pay & use toilet of ‘A’ class (Scheduled Tribes (Women) Category) which is allotted by Respondents in favour of the Petitioner.
3. That on 25.10.2024, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has grant a time for handing over the vacant possession of catering stall in question till 27.12.2024, subject to an undertaking to be given stating that the petitioner will vacate the premises on or before 27.12.2024 within two weeks from today.
4. I say that I hereby giving undertaking to vacate the stall in question as per order dated 25.10.2024 passed by this Hon’ble Court in SLP(C) No. 23728 of 2024 but I reserve my right to file the Review Petition in SLP(C) No. 23728 of 2024.
5. I say that I have gone through the present Affidavit/Undertaking. The contents of the same may be read as a part of this affidavit and same are true and correct .”
PRATEEK JALAN, J
DECEMBER 17, 2024 ‘Bhupi/AD’/
Page 3 of 3
W.P.(C) 17294/2024
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 19/12/2024 at 13:07:40
Ms Kaushalya Meena
Union of India
Prateek Jalan
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
