Aman Malik Advocate v. Union Of India & ORS.

$~88 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5804/2026 AMAN MALIK ADVOCATE .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Atishay Jain & Ms. Diksha Jindal, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Jivesh Kr. Tiwari, CGSC with Ms.

Nandini Aggarwal & Ms.

Samiksha, Advs. for R-1/UOI.

Ms. Chand Chopra with Mr. Punishk Handa, Advs. for R-2/DDA.

Mr. Roshan Lal Goel & Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Advs. for R-3/MCD.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

O R D E R

% 29.04.2026 1.

Heard Mr. Atishay Jain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Ms. Chand Chopra, learned counsel representing the DDA and Mr. Roshan Lal Goel, learned counsel representing MCD.

2.

This petition purportedly in Public Interest has been filed by the petitioner who has described himself to be an advocate with the prayer to issue appropriate direction to the respondents to remove/demolish the alleged illegal and unauthorised construction/encroachment said to have been raised by respondent nos.4 & 5 over public land/Nazul land/DDA land comprised in Khasra No.720/200, Village Maujpur, Shahdara, Delhi known The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

as Property No.A-10, Shyam Gali No.1, Maujpur, Shahdara, Delhi. 3.

Earlier the petitioner had instituted writ petition being W.P.(C) 14379/2025 for the similar prayer. The petition was, however, disposed of by this Court vide order dated 17.09.2025 observing therein that the petitioner before approaching the Court ought to have approached the Special Task Force which is entrusted with removal of encroachments/demolition etc. and has been formed pursuant to an order passed by the Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India reported in (2006) 3 SCC 399.

4.

When confronted with the query as to whether in view of the observations made by this Court on 17.09.2025 while disposing of W.P.(C) No. 14379/2025, the petitioner has approached the Special Task Force, our attention has been drawn to a letter which has been enclosed as Annexure P6 to the writ petition written by one Mr. Sudhanshu Sharma, Advocate to the Chief Executive Officer, Special Task Force, however, the said letter is apparently unsigned and even undated.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has tendered a photocopy of the postal receipt which discloses that some letter was dispatched on 12.12.2025 which was booked by the said Shri Sudhanshu Sharma. The same is taken on record.

6.

The earlier petition as also the instant petition have been instituted by Shri Aman Malik, Advocate whereas the representation/complaint is said to have been filed by Shri Sudhanshu Sharma, Advocate. 7.

A perusal of the letter enclosed as Annexure P-6 does not disclose that this complaint was made by Shri Sudhanshu Sharma on the instructions of the petitioner.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

8.

In the aforesaid view of the matter, since the petitioner has not approached the appropriate authorities concerned in terms of our observations made in our order dated 17.09.2025, we are not inclined to entertain the present petition. Accordingly the same is dismissed with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to the Delhi High Court Bar Clerk's Association (Account No.15530100006282, IFSC Code: UCBA0001553, UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch).

DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ TEJAS KARIA, J APRIL 29, 2026 ab The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.