Meghna Bhuyan Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

$~2 (Appellate Side)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

- W.P.(C) 3876/2025, CM APPL. 1685/2026, CM APPL. 1686/2026 & CM APPL. 9815/2026

MEGHNA BHUYAN .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rudra Pratap, Mr. Tushar Randhawa, Mr. Rahul Sharma, Mr. Ali Ibrahim, Advs. with petitioner in person. Mob: 8800000881 Email: [email protected]

¶5

versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Tarunvir Singh Khehar and Mr. Guneet Bindra, Advs. for MCD Mob: 9910122225 Email: [email protected] Mr. Nimish Chib, Adv. and Mr. Ajay Mishra, Adv. for R-4 to 8. Mob: 9810823566 Email: [email protected]

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

¶7

O R D E R % 12.02.2026

¶8

CM APPL. 1686/2026 (For Exemption)

¶9

Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶10

Application is disposed of.

¶11

CM APPL. 1685/2026 (For recalling of the order dated 17^th November,

¶12

2025)

¶13

Page 1 of 5

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 16/02/2026 at 13:50:17

¶16

The present application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking recall of the order dated 17^th November, 2025 passed by this Court. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that at the time of hearing of the matter on 17^th November, 2025, the petitioner was not represented by any counsel, as the new counsel engaged by the petitioner, i.e., Mr. Rudra Pratap, who was not present on the said date.

¶17

The petitioner, i.e., Ms. Meghna Bhuyan, is present in person before this Court and confirms the fact that she had engaged Mr. Rudra Pratap, Advocate, as reflected in the order dated 27^th October, 2025.

¶18

Ms. Meghna Bhuyan submits that since she had engaged Mr. Rudra Pratap as a new counsel, therefore, Mr. M. A. Chaudhary and Mr. Shehzad Khan, Advocates assisted by Mr. Vivek Dixit, Mr. Salimuddin and Mr. Kanish Singh, Advocates, were not entitled to appear on behalf of the petitioner on 17^th November, 2025, as recorded in the said order.

¶19

It is submitted that the said counsels wrongly put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner on the said date. 8. However, Mr. M. A. Chaudhary and Mr. Shehzad Khan, Advocates are present in Court before this Court and submit that they had validly appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 17^th November, 2025.

¶20

Considering the submissions made before this Court, the matter is referred to the Bar Council of Delhi (“BCD”), to resolve the issues in this regard, and pass appropriate orders after following the due process. 10. The details of Mr. M. A. Chaudhary and Mr. Shehzad Khan, Advocates, are given as under:

¶21

“Mr. M. A. Chaudhary, Advocate Enrollment No. D/654/2021

¶22

Page 2 of 5

¶23

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 16/02/2026 at 13:50:17

¶24

Mob: 9810506786 Email: [email protected]

¶25

Mr. Shehzad Khan, Advocate Enrollment No. D/567/92

¶26

Mob: 9716379252

¶27

Email: [email protected]”

¶28

The details of Mr. Rudra Pratap, Advocate, are given as under:

¶29

“Mr. Rudra Pratap, Advocate Enrollment No. D/4102/2013

¶30

Mob: 8800000881

¶31

Email: [email protected]”

¶32

Ms. Meghna Bhuyan is present in Court, and her Aadhaar Card, as given to this Court, is reproduced as under:

¶33

Page 3 of 5

¶34

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 16/02/2026 at 13:50:17

¶35

The details of Ms. Meghna Bhuyan, the petitioner in the present case, are further noted as under:

¶36

“Name: Meghna Bhuyan Aadhaar No. 5308 4353 2383 Mob: 8851141912, 9953714157 Email: [email protected]”

¶37

The petitioner, Ms. Meghna Bhuyan, is at liberty to make a representation to the BCD, which shall issue notices to the respective parties and pass appropriate orders, after following the due process.

¶38

This Court notes that vide order dated 17^th November, 2025, this Court had disposed of the present writ petition on the ground that the earlier No Objection Certificate (“NOC”) granted by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”) for installation of the lift had been withdrawn by the MCD vide its order dated 22^nd October, 2025.

¶39

Subsequently, the MCD has given a new permission on 22^nd December, 2025.

¶40

Since, the present writ petition had been filed within respect to the earlier permission granted by MCD vide letter dated 10^th February, 2025, in view of the fact that the said permission already stood withdrawn vide order dated 22^nd October, 2025, the present writ petition had become infructuous. 18. Accordingly, considering the submissions made before this Court, the petitioner, i.e., Ms. Meghna Bhuyan is granted liberty to file a fresh writ petition challenging the new/fresh permission dated 22^nd December, 2025 issued by the MCD for installation of the lift in question.

¶41

Needless to state, this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, which shall be adjudicated at the relevant time, in the appropriate proceedings.

¶42

Page 4 of 5

¶43

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 16/02/2026 at 13:50:17

¶44

20. With the aforesaid directions, the present application is disposed of. CM APPL. 9815/2026

¶45

The present application has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 4 seeking directions that the respondent no. 4 may not be restrained from installation of the lift, in terms of the NOC dated 22^nd December, 2025, issued by the respondent no. 1, i.e., MCD.

¶46

Needless to state, the respondent no. 4 is at liberty to carry out the work of installation of the lift, in terms of NOC dated 22^nd December, 2025, issued by the MCD, subject to any order that may be passed in any writ that may be filed by the petitioner, i.e., Ms. Meghna Bhuyan, or to any subsequent order that may be passed by the MCD pursuant to the representation made by the petitioner in that regard.

¶47

With the aforesaid directions, the present application is disposed of.

¶48

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶49

FEBRUARY 12, 2026 ak

¶50

Page 5 of 5

¶51

This is a digitally signed order.

¶52

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 16/02/2026 at 13:50:17

Meghna Bhuyan v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meghna Bhuyan v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.C.Sharma Vs UOI & Ors.

Jawahar Lal Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Ors.

Inder Singh Since Deceased through Lr Krishan Rana Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Shangri-La International Hotel Management Pte. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income-Tax (International TAX)-3, Delhi & Ors.

Annu Devi Vs Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board

Rajesh Kumar Sharma Individual Non Taxable Entity, Director a and T Security Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Addl. Commisisoner of Cgst Delhi West & Anr.

Munna Prasad Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation & Anr.

M/S Rbc Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sanjeev Garg Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

M/S Singh and Sons Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mohd Mansoor Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Mohammad Rehan Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

H S Sharma Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Azidul Hoque & Ors. Vs Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Anr.