Disposed

Park Area Karol Bagh Residents Welfare Association (Regd.) v. Lt Governor, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC1 May 2024W.P.(C)/5862/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged alleged construction of a medical dispensary in Ajmal Khan Park. Court found no construction based on respondent counsel's statement. Petitioner directed to submit representation regarding necessity of dispensary; court to pass speaking order after hearing.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit representation to Executive Engineer, MCD; court to consider with hearing and pass speaking order within four weeks. Petition disposed.

Park Area Karol Bagh Residents Welfare… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~2

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 5862/2024 and CM APPL.24228/2024

¶4

PARK AREA KAROL BAGH RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION (REGD.) ..... Petitioner Through: Advocate (appearance not given) versus

¶5

LT GOVERNOR, GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

¶6

..... Respondents Through: Mr. Anupam Srivastava, ASC along with Mr. Deepak Jain, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Vikas Chopra, SC along with Ms. Anita R. Mishra, Adv. for R-2/MCD. Mr. Sanjay Katyal, SC along with Mr. Nihal Singh, Adv. for DDA.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 01.05.2024

¶11

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the action of the respondent no.2 to allegedly construct a medical dispensary in Ajmal Khan Park.

¶12

It is submitted by the petitioner that any construction within the precincts of the park is impermissible, and would also severely and adversely affect the character of the park in question, which is a heritage park.

¶13

Learned counsel for the respondent no.2/MCD, who appears on advance notice, submits that no construction whatsoever within the park has been carried out by the MCD, and that only the pre-existing rooms are sought to be utilised.

¶14

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 04/05/2024 at 14:50:16

¶15

As such, the apprehension of the petitioner that any construction is being carried out by the MCD stands resolved in view of the aforesaid statement of learned counsel for the MCD.

¶16

The only other grievance sought to be agitated by the petitioner is that there is no necessity of a dispensary within the Ajmal Khan Park inasmuch as there are two government hospitals just in the vicinity of the said park. It is submitted that the pre-existing rooms can be used for any other purpose by the MCD. The petitioner is at liberty to make a representation in this regard to the concerned Executive Engineer of the MCD, Karol Bagh Zone, New Delhi. Upon such a representation being made, the same shall be duly considered and a speaking order shall be passed thereon after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Let any such representation, as may be made by the petitioner in this regard be disposed of within a period of four weeks from the date of submission of such representation. 6. Taking on record the aforesaid statement of learned counsel for MCD and with the aforesaid directions, the present petition, along with pending application/s, is disposed of.

¶17

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶18

MAY 1, 2024/ cl

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 04/05/2024 at 14:50:16

Park Area Karol Bagh Residents Welfare Association (Regd.) v. Lt Governor, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Park Area Karol Bagh Residents Welfare Association (Regd.) v. Lt Governor, Govt. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Fides Distribution P. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax Delhi South & Ors.

Om Trans Logistics Ltd. Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 19(1) Delhi & Anr.

Bhagat Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Raash Mechanicals Private Limited Vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax Cental CIRCLE-25 Delhi & Anr.

Powertech Electroinfra Private Limited Vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax Cental CIRCLE-25 Delhi & Anr.

Csl Food Products Private Limited Vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax Central CIRCLE-28 Delhi & Anr.

Kamlesh Rani Jain Vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax Cental CIRCLE-28 Delhi & Anr.

Yulduzhan Urakova Vs Foreigners Regional Registration Officer

S P Sangwan Vs Union of India and Anr.

Anita Malik Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Para Sports Association of Haryana and Anr. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Raj Rishi Vs Gyanesh Bharti & Ors.

Madhu Mala Vs Lt. Governor, Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Raj Rishi Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr.