Mumtaz v. Delhi Development Authority & ANR.

$~100 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 1367/2025, CM APPL. 44866/2025 & CM APPL. 44867/2025 MUMTAZ .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Syed Hasan Isfahani, Adv.

versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Ms.

Shobhana Takiar, Standing Counsel for DDA with Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Mr. Shivam Takiar & Mr.

Prateek Dhir, Advs. for R-1.

Mr. Tushar Sannu, Standing Counsel for DWB with Mr. Shivam, Adv. for R-2/DWB.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

O R D E R

% 28.07.2025 1.

Petitioner has invoked supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution of India as he is aggrieved by the imposition of cost of Rs.5,000/- upon him.

2.

Learned counsel for the respondents appear on advance notice. 3.

This Court has gone through the various orders passed by the learned Trial Court from time to time, including the impugned order. 4.

Fact, however, remains that invocation of supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 does not seem to be warranted herein, as even otherwise, CM(M) 1367/2025 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 31/07/2025 at 12:22:14

the cost is neither excessive nor unconscionable. 5.

Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.

6.

Let the unpaid cost be deposited with the concerned Authority within two weeks from today.

7.

Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 8.

Pending applications also stand disposed of in aforesaid terms. MANOJ JAIN, J JULY 28, 2025/ck/shs CM(M) 1367/2025 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 31/07/2025 at 12:22:14