← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/6671/2016

Preeti v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation And ANR

2016-08-01Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Indermeet Kaur2 pages

$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6671/2016 & C.M. No.27317/2016 PREETI ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Dharmendra Singh, Adv.

versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ANR ..... Respondents Through

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 01.08.2016 The petitioner in the present petition is seeking a prayer that illegal constructions at property No.D-62, Gali No.6, Hakikat Rai Road, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi be demolished as it is the illegal structure. On advance notice, learned counsel for the respondents has put in appearance. His submission as per instruction is that plan qua this property has been sanctioned way back on 22.04.2010. Para 6 of the petition shows that an oral complaint had been made but to whom it has been made has been delineated. No photographs have also been filed to substantiate the general submission made in this petition that the aforenoted construction is illegal. Learned counsel for the respondents rightly points out that there appears to be an undercurrent in the filing of the present petition and it is not clear for what ulterior purpose it has been filed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner (Mr. Vishal Khanna,

Advocate) has also filed a connected petition which is W.P. (C) No.6672/2016 and this Court has been informed that two more writ petitions qua similar property in the similar area are yet pending and are to be filed as advance copies of the same have been received by the respondents. This Court takes a serious note of this submission which has been made by the learned counsel for the respondents. This petition is disposed of in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondents but in case, this Court notes that there is an undercurrent and prima-facie, there appears to be a motive for presenting this petition, appropriate action shall be taken. The counsel has been warned on this count because the writ petition itself shows that it is bereft of particulars. INDERMEET KAUR, J AUGUST 01, 2016