Jitender Singh Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through the Commissioner

¶1

$~106

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CNR No. DLHC010443632026

¶4

- W.P.(C) 13692/2026 & CM APPL. 63883/2026

¶5

JITENDER SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Amit Kumar, Ms. Khusboo Sharma, Mr. Vijay Gaur, Mr. Rohit Verma, Mr. Kartik and Mr. Govind Keshav, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER .....Respondent Through: Mr. Anand Prakash, SC, MCD with Ms. Varsha Arya, Advocate.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶10

1. This writ petition seeks the following relief:

¶11

“A. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent to consider and decide the Petitioners' representation dated 12.06.2026 in a time-bound manner;

¶12

B. Direct the Respondent to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the said representation within a reasonable period as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court;

¶13

C. Grant liberty to the Petitioners to avail appropriate remedies in accordance with law in case the decision on representation is adverse;”

¶14

At the outset, counsel for the Respondents objects to the maintainability of the present petition on the ground that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”) is a notified authority under Section 14(2) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, and the dispute raised herein falls

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 21/09/2026 at 11:42:38

¶17

within the jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India & Ors .,² wherein it was held that, in areas for which Tribunals have been constituted, they are to function as courts of first instance. The jurisdiction of the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 remains unaffected, but is ordinarily exercised after the matter has first been considered by the Tribunal.

¶18

However, having regard to the limited nature of the relief sought in the present petition, the Respondent is directed to consider and decide the Petitioner’s representation dated 12^th June, 2026, in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from today. The decision taken thereon shall be communicated to the Petitioner.

¶19

In case the Petitioner is aggrieved by the decision taken on the aforesaid representation, he shall be at liberty to avail their remedies before the Central Administrative Tribunal, in accordance with law.

¶20

It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the Petitioners’ claims, and all rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

¶21

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of, along with any pending application.

¶22

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶23

SEPTEMBER 17, 2026/ hc

¶24

2 (1997) 3 SCC 261.

¶25

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 21/09/2026 at 11:42:38

Jitender Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi through the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

Case summary

Jitender Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi through the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

Case summary

Case details

Similar cases

Jai Hanuman Traders Vs Union of India & Anr.

Alok Kumar Vs University of Delhi & Ors.

Katyani Exports through Its Proprietor Sh. Ajay Singh Gautam Vs Union of India and Ors.

Divine Creations through Its Partner Sh. Ajay Singh Gautam Vs Union of India and Ors.

Devinder Kumar & Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

M/S Carnival Greens Vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee (Dpcc) & Ors.

Sanskriti Exim Private Limited Vs Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Dzu and Ors.

Saraswati Printers Vs Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Dzu and Ors.