Dimple Sachdeva v. Sanjeev Kumar Mittal & ANR.

$~72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 8thJanuary, 2025 + CONT.CAS(C) 1703/2024 DIMPLE SACHDEVA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Anshu Mahajan with Mr. Vikas Aggarwal, Advocates.

versus SANJEEV KUMAR MITTAL & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Anuj Chaturvedi with Ms.Richa Dhawan, Mr. Harshita Maheshwari and Mr. Karan Kumar Deo, Advocates for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1.

Petitioner seeks initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondents for wilfull disobedience of the specific directions contained in order dated 24.04.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) 11449/2023.

2.

This Court has seen the above said order dated 24.04.2024 whereby the writ petition, as aforesaid, was directed to be treated as a representation and the DSIIDC was directed to take an independent view of the matter and to decide the same within the period of six weeks.

3.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the period of six weeks has already expired and he has not heard anything from DSIIDC.

CONT.CAS(C) 1703/2024 1 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL 11:05:06

4.

Learned counsel for DSIIDC appears on advance notice and submits that there is no disobedience of the order as the representation of the petitioner has already been considered on 23.08.2024 and such representation did not find favour with DSIIDC. 5.

When asked, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the petitioner never received any such communication by any mode and it has come to their notice for the first time, today itself. 6.

A copy of such order has also been shown during the course of the proceedings which may be made part of the e-file. 7.

A copy thereof has also been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner during course of the arguments.

8.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of above, the contempt petition may be disposed of as not pressed. He also submits that the petitioner shall challenge the above order dated 23.08.2024 by filing a substantive petition.

9.

When asked, learned counsel for the respondents informed that the industrial plot in question has yet not been allotted to anybody else so far.

10.

Let status-quo, accordingly, be maintained for a period of two weeks from today to enable the petitioner to avail legal action, as permissible under law.

11.

The petition is, accordingly, disposed of as not pressed in aforesaid terms.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE JANUARY 8, 2025/st CONT.CAS(C) 1703/2024 2 By:SONIA THAPLIYAL 11:05:06