Baba Firozuddin v. State Of Delhi And ORS

Signed By:RAM DATT Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.

.y $~5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

W.P.(C) 5076/2017 & CM No.21775/2017 + % Date of Decision: 14^*" December. 2017 BABA FIROZUDDIN ....Petitioner Mr. M.A. Rahman with Mr.

A. Kalam, Advs.

Through:

versus STATE OF DELHI AND ORS Through:

....Respondent Mr. Satyakam, ASC for GNCTD.

Mr. Wajeeh Shafiq, Standing Counsel for Delhi Waqf Board.

Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel for DDA.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT tORALt GITA MITTAL. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE 1.

This writ petition has been filed claiming discharge of religious functions over the property described as Dargah Baba Jalali Peer situated at Tikona Kabristan, Ameer Khusro Park, Hazrat Nizammuddin, New Delhi.

2.

As per the status report filed by the respondent No.4-Delhi Development Authority, it is stated that the petitioner has no locus W.P.(C) No.5076/2017 Pg. 1 of 2

standi as all his claims false, fabricated and only to create are confusion.

3. This fact is confirmed by another status report dated 20^ September, 2017 filed by Inspector Satendra Mohan, Station House Officer, P.S. Hazrat Nizamuddin, New Delhi, who has stated that the petitioner has illegally occupied the DDA/Govemment land by erecting an unauthorized encroachment, and illegal construction in the Ameer Khusro Park, which has been removed/demolished by € the DDA. The unauthorized and illegal constructions done by the petitioner in Ameer Khusro Park and execution of the said demolition was successfully carried out on 16th and 17th May, 2017.

4.

Ml'. Wajeeh Shafiq, Id. Standing Counsel for the Delhi Waqf Board also submits that the petitioner has no right at all to raise any constructions in Amir Khusro Park.

5.

The petitioner does not disclose any legal right and entitlement in support of his claim. There are also no documents at all in this regard.

We find no merit in the writ petition.

The writ petition as well as the pending application accordingly dismissed.

are ACTMg CjfflEFJlJSTICE C.HARl SH R, J DECEMBER 14, 2017/pmc W.P.(C)No.5076/2017 Pg.2of2