Ms. Urmila Singh And ORS. v. Govt. Of N.C.T Of Delhi And ORS.

$~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1176/2019 MS. URMILA SINGH AND ORS.

..... Petitioners Through:

Mr.Shashank, Adv.

versus GOVT. OF N.C.T OF DELHI AND ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Rishikesh Kumar, ASC with Mr.Vikas Saini, Adv. for R-1 & 3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R D E R

% 04.02.2019 1.

Vide the present petition, the petitioners seek a directions to the respondent no.1 i.e. SDM, Lawrence Road, Pandit Lekhram Sharma Marg, Delhi to take steps to recover the awarded amount along with the accrued interest from the respondent no. 2 in accordance with the Recovery Certificate dated 06.06.2018 issued by the respondent No. 3.

2.

Mr.Rishikesh Kumar, learned counsel, who appears on advance notice on behalf of respondent no.1 and 3, states that the respondent no.1 is well aware of its statutory duties and in case the petitioners had approached the respondents along with the recovery certificate for taking steps to recover the awarded amount from respondent no.2, there was no reason as to why the respondent no.1 would not have taken appropriate steps in accordance with law.

3.

Be that as it may, now that a copy of the writ petition along with the recovery certificate is available with the respondent no.1, it is expected that the respondent no.1 will take appropriate steps in furtherance of the recovery certificate within eight weeks in accordance with law after following the due procedure as per law. The petitioner is also granted liberty to move an appropriate application before the respondent no.1 to bring to its notice the order passed by this Court today.

4.

In view of the categoric statement made by the respondent no.1, the petitioner does not press the writ petition any further. 5.

The petition is disposed of as not pressed. However, the respondent no.1 will remain bound by the statement to take appropriate action as per law.

REKHA PALLI, J FEBRUARY 04, 2019 gm