M/S Begraj Vedpal v. Delhi Agricultural Marketing Board And ANR.
$~21 to 30 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
W.P.(C) 5319/2018 & CM APPL. 20634/2018, 35596/2018 M/S BEGRAJ VEDPAL
Versus
22.
W.P.(C) 5320/2018 & CM No.20636/2018 M/S BISHT FLOWERS
Versus
23.
W.P.(C) 5321/2018 & CM No.20638/2018 SH. SHER SINGH SAINI
Versus
24.
W.P.(C) 5324/2018 & CM No.20647/2018 SANGEETA CHAUHAN
Versus
BOARD & ANR 25.
W.P.(C) 5325/2018 & CM No.20649/2018 MOHMMAD JAMIL BOARD & ANR 26.
W.P.(C) 5327/2018 & CM No.20653/2018 SH. RAKESH JAISWAL
27.
W.P.(C) 5328/2018 & CM No.20655/2018 SH. K.N. SHARMA 28.
W.P.(C) 5329/2018 & CM No.20657/2018 PRADEEP NAINWAL BOARD & ANR 29.
W.P.(C) 5363/2018 & CM No.20800-20801/2018 SH. NARESH KUMAR
30.
W.P.(C) 5370/2018 & CM No.20891-20892/2018 SH. SUJEET SAINI
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
O R D E R
% 04.04.2019 1.
The petitioners are traders engaged in the whole sale trade of flowers and are licence holders of B-Category Licence for operating in the Flower Trade Centre located at Ghazipur. The prayers made in the petitions are similarly worded and read as under:- "(a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the Resolution No. 367/2016 dated 23.02.2016 and Allotment/Shifting Letters dated 31.05.2016 issued by the Respondent No. 2 in favour of some selective traders having Shops Nos. B-2 to B-11;
(b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondent No. 1 Board not to proceed with any further actions pursuant to the aforesaid impugned reallotment/shifting letters dated 31.05.2016; (c ) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction against the Respondents to pass a speaking order within a period as prescribed by this Hon'ble Court based on a fair, transparent, uniform and unbiased procedure to shift/relocate the traders including the Petitioner from their present disadvantageous location to a better location preferably near the market gate of the Flower Market, Gazipur, Delhi;"
2.
Insofar as prayer (a) is concerned - that is, regarding the petitioners' challenge to the resolution dated 23.02.2016 and allotment letters dated 31.05.2016 issued to the traders having shop Nos. B-2 to B-11 - the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners states that the petitioners do not wish to press the said prayer. He further states that a representation for allotment of alternate sites (Phars) would be made to the concerned Flower Market Committee and the petitioners would be satisfied if the Flower Market Committee is directed to consider the said representation(s). 3.
This is agreeable to the respondents.
4.
In view of the consensus between the counsel for both the parties, the petitioners are permitted to make representation(s) to the respondents. In the event, the petitioners make representation within a period of two weeks from today, the concerned Flower Market Committee shall consider the same and pass a speaking order as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of eight weeks thereafter.
5.
The petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid terms. All pending applications stand disposed of.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J APRIL 04, 2019 pkv