Ranjeet v. New Delhi Municipal Counicl And ANR

$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 273/2017 RANJEET ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate with Ms.

Renu Singh, Advocate.

versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNICL AND ANR..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sri Harsha Peechara, Advocate along with Mr. Mananjay Mishra and Ms. Vidhi Jain, Advocates for NDMC.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL

O R D E R

% 19.01.2017 The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioner claims to be vending at Shop No. 19, Mother Dairy Chowk, Sarojini Nagar Market, New Delhi (wrongly mentioned as Shop No. 1 in the memo of parties). The grievance of the petitioner is that his open space stands sealed by the concerned Inspector, photographs have been placed on record, while similarly situated persons have been allowed to vend. Time was sought by the counsel for the NDMC to seek instructions.

Mr. Harsha, learned counsel for the NDMC, submits that the vending site in question has not been sealed and in fact the petitioner

has left the shop and gone to his hometown as per the instructions of the concerned Inspector, which is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that only after the shop was sealed, the petitioner went to his hometown.

Be that as it may, since the stand of the NDMC is that the shop in question has not been sealed by them, the petitioner would be allowed to vend as he was vending there earlier. In view of the stand taken by counsel for the NDMC no further orders are called for. The petition is disposed of, binding the respondent to the statement made in the court.

Order dasti, as prayed.

G.S.SISTANI, J VINOD GOEL, J JANUARY 19, 2017 "sk"