Rishab Garg & ORS v. The Government Of NCT Of Delhi & ORS

$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3671/2020 RISHAB GARG & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Sanyam Jain, Ms.Bandana Grover, Advs. alongwith petitioner no.1 in person. versus THE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Anupam Srivastava, ASC with Mr.Dhairya Gupta, Adv. for R-1,3 and 5.

Mr.Mukesh Gutpa, SC, MCD/R-2.

Ms.Kanika Sinha, Mr.Tanmaya Sinha, Mr.Manav Vohra, Advs. for R-4.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 23.06.2020 This hearing has been held by video conferencing. CM 13176/2020 (Exemption from filing notarized affidavit and affixing of court fee) 1.

This application has been filed seeking exemption from filing duly notarised affidavits and affixing requisite court fee. Binding the deponent of the affidavit to the contents of the application, the exemption is granted. 2.

Court fee shall be deposited online with the concerned authority within one week and physical stamp be filed within 72 hours from the date of resumption of regular functioning of the Court, as mandated in terms of Office Order dated April 04, 2020 issued by this Court. 3.

Application is disposed of.

WP(C) 3671/2020 & CM 13130/2020 (direction) The learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that the respondent no.2 is neither a necessary nor a proper party in the present petition inasmuch as the area in question falls within the jurisdiction of North Delhi Municipal Corporation. As the petition has been disposed of today, the petitioners shall take note of the said submissions. This petition has been filed by the petitioners primarily being aggrieved with the use of the respondent no.4 Hotel as a quarantine facility under the Vande Bharat Scheme for the people travelling into India from abroad.

The learned counsel for the respondent nos.1,3 and 5 submits that on receipt of the writ petition, an inspection was carried out by the said respondents of the premises of the respondent no.4. In such inspection, all protocols were found to be duly followed by the respondent no.4. He further submits that the guests that are being housed in the respondent no.4 are being regularly monitored and none of them is suffering from Covid-19 virus. He further submits that the rooms in the respondent no.4 hotel do not have any openable windows or balconies and therefore, the fear of the petitioners is totally unfounded.

The submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent nos.1, 3 and 5 are supported by the learned counsel for the respondent no.4, who assures the Court that all protocols required for running this facility would be duly followed by the respondent no.4. In view of the above, I find no merit in the present petition. However, if the petitioners have any issues in future, they may highlight the same with

the SHO/District Magistrate of the area concerned, who shall look into such a complaint expeditiously.

The petition as well as pending application are disposed of with the above directions.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J JUNE 23, 2020 RN