Shiv Gorakh Nath Kal Bhairav Hanuman Mandir Trust v. Delhi Development Authority
#22 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1767/2017 & & CM APPL. 7845-7846/2017 SHIV GORAKH NATH KAL BHAIRAV HANUMAN MANDIR TRUST ..... Petitioner Through Ms. Priya Saxena, Advocate versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel for DDA.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
O R D E R
% 09.03.2017 Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent-DDA to reconstruct the demolished portion of the property bearing no. 77, Khasra No. 117, Ground Floor, Block-F, Mangolpuri Industrial Area, Phase-II, Delhi. Petitioner further prays for a direction thereby restraining the respondent-DDA from further demolishing the said property.
Learned counsel for the petitioner-Trust states that even though the said land is owned and possessed by it, yet the officials of the respondentDDA demolished some portion of the same on 9th February, 2017. She further states that the officials of respondent-DDA have been threatening to carry out further demolition even when respondent-DDA has no right to
carry out the demolition on the said land.
On the other hand, learned standing counsel for respondent-DDA states that the land in question had been acquired and handed over to DDA in 1964.
On 27th February, 2017, this Court had directed the petitioner to place on record the sanctioned plan as well as ownership documents of the property in question.
On 2nd March, 2017, the counsel for the petitioner had sought for further time to place on record the said documents. Even today, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks further time to place on record the ownership documents as well as sanctioned plan. This Court is of the view that the petitioner should have annexed these documents along with the writ petition. After filing the writ petition, petitioner cannot take repeated adjournments to look for the relevant papers.
Consequently, present writ petition and pending applications being devoid of merits is dismissed.
MANMOHAN, J MARCH 09, 2017 rn