Ranjeet Mishra v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC24 Jan 2025W.P.(C)/947/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Natural justice; opportunity of hearing denied; show cause notice required before fresh action; unauthorised tea shop allegation; closure order set aside; SDM Seelampur Court Complex; tea stall livelihood since 2011; Seelampur Bar Association allotment request 2014; notice F.No. SDM/S.PUR/2024/8951 dated 09.10.2024; reply dated 23.10.2024; Delhi High Court writ petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 13.01.2025 set aside; any fresh action against the petitioner to be preceded by a Show Cause Notice and an opportunity of hearing. ¶¶32

Ranjeet Mishra Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

$~42

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 947/2025 RANJEET MISHRA .....Petitioner

¶4

Through: Mr. Amit Kr. Jain, Adv. for applicant.

¶5

versus

¶6

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi, Adv.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA O R D E R % 24.01.2025

¶9

CM APPL.4662/2025 (Exemption)

¶10

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶11

Application stands disposed of.

¶12

W.P.(C) 947/2025 and CM APPL.4663/2025 (Stay)

¶13

The present petition has been filed by petitioner seeking quashing of the order dated 13.01.2025, passed by the respondent whereby the petitioner has been directed to close his tea shop in SDM, Seelampur Court Complex, GT Road, Seelampur, Delhi-110053.

¶14

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been running the said tea stall since 2011 to earn his livelihood and to support his wife and three minor school going children.

¶15

It is pointed out that as far back as on 20.01.2014, the President of the Seelampur Bar Association wrote a letter to the respondent (SDM, Seelampur) for allotment of a tea stall in the Seelampur Court Complex which was duly received by the respondent on 21.01.2014. Thereafter, the petitioner has been uninterruptedly operating the tea stall in the name of M/s

¶16

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 28/01/2025 at 14:28:43

¶17

Keshav Tea Stall.

¶18

It is submitted that on 09.10.2024, a notice was sent by the respondent vide F. No.SDM/S.PUR/2024/8951 to the petitioner alleging that the tea shop was being run unauthorizedly by the petitioner. The same was duly replied to by the petitioner. The said notice dated 09.10.2024 reads as under:

¶19

“ F.No. SDM/S.PUR/2024/8951 Dated: 09.10.2024

¶20

NOTICE

¶21

Frequent complaints are being received regarding unauthorized operation of tea shop, which is functioning from the SDM Seelampur Court Complex, GT Road, Seelampur, Delhi-53.

¶22

It has been informed that Sh. Ranjeev Mishra, tea seller is being run a tea shop in the Seelampur SDM Court complex without the necessary authorization.

¶23

Sh. Ranjeet Mishra is here by directed to appear before the undersigned latest by 15.10.2024, along with relevant documents and submit in writing, whether he has been allotted the said place and whether he has been granted proper permission by the competent authority for carrying on these activities from the present place of business in the SDM Office Court Complex Seelampur or not in case of failure to provide the reply /documents appropriate action will be taken against the said Sh. Ranjeet Mishra including removal from the existing place and business in the SDM Seelampur office Court complex.

¶24

(NITESH SINGH RAWAT) SDM (SEELAMPUR) ”

¶25

It is evident from the above that the petitioner was afforded an opportunity to appear before the SDM, Seelampur, latest by 15.10.2024, pursuant to the aforesaid notice. However, it appears that no specific date was fixed for appearance of the petitioner.

¶26

A reply dated 23.10.2024 was submitted by the petitioner wherein the relevant factual background was set out. It was pointed out that the

¶27

¶28

petitioner has been catering to the requirements of the Seelampur Court Complex for more than a decade. The letter written by the President of the Seelampur Bar Association to the SDM as far back as on 2014 was also referred to in the said letter.

¶29

It appears that thereafter, without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned letter dated 13.01.2025 was issued. The impugned order acknowledges that the petitioner was directed to “appear before the undersigned”, however, during the course of hearing today it is not disputed that in actual fact, the order was passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Clearly, the impugned order is in disregard of the principles of natural justice.

¶30

Consequently, the impugned order is unsustainable in law. The same is accordingly, set aside.

¶31

It is made clear that in case any fresh action is sought to be taken by the concerned SDM against the petitioner, a Show Cause Notice, followed by an opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to the petitioner. The concerned SDM shall also take into account the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case.

¶32

The present petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶33

SACHIN DATTA, J

¶34

JANUARY 24, 2025/ cl

¶35

This is a digitally signed order.

¶36

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 28/01/2025 at 14:28:43

Ranjeet Mishra v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Mishra v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

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

UOI and Ors. Vs Ashu and Ors.

Rajender Jain and Ors. Vs Delhi Development Authority and Ors.

Vishvanath Agarwal Vs Election Commission of India and Ors.

UOI and Ors. Vs Chinmay Garg and Ors.

M/S. Golden Tobie Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs & Ors.

Rohtash Kumar Godara Vs Border Security Force

Sh. Shivaji Sah & Anr. Vs the Bses Yamuna Power Limited

Narindar Lal Anand and Ors. Vs Lt. Governor, NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Veer Singh Vs Regional Passport Officer Delhi and Others

Rakesh Yadav Vs Atul Sibal and Ors.

Antriksh Real Tech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Atul Sibal and Ors.

Ajit Kumar Bhardwaj Vs Building Maintenance and Care Committee & Ors.

Sqay Federation of India Vs Union of India

Ms Sai Communication Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.