← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/6444/2015

Radha v. New Delhi Municipal Council & ANR

2015-07-08Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw3 pages

/ $34to36,38to41,43to45 &2to3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI • W.P.(C) 6396/2015 KELA BAWARIYA Petitioner

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents • W.P.(C) 6402/2015 GULAB Petitioner

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents • W.P.(C) 6404/2015 SUIPYAR BAWARIYA Petitioner

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents • W.P.(C) 6408/2015 BI-IOTI Petitioner

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents + W.P.(C)6409/2015 RAM SWAROOP BAWARIYA Petitioner

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents • W.P.(C) 6410/2015 KAMOD Petitioner

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents + W.P.(C) 6411/2015 PHOOL WATT Petitioner By:AMULYA

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents W.P.(C) 6431/2015 HUKUM BAI + Petitioner

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents W.P.(C) 6433/2015 + RAMS WAROOP BAWARIYA Petitioner

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR W.P.(C) 6444/2015 RADHA Respondents + Petitioner *1

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents ± W.P.(C) 6333/2015 MAMTA Petitioner

Versus

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR + W.P.(C) 6335/2015 MUKESH Respondents Petitioner

Versus

No NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR Respondents Counsel for the petitioners: Mr. Satish Kurnar Tripathi, Adv. Counsel for the respondents: Mr. Aijun Pant and Mr. Vipin Tyagi, Advs. for NDMC.

g

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

ORDER

% 08.07.2015 1.

These petitions have been filed by street vendors, seeking to restrain the respondent New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) from removing them from the respective sites from which each of the petitioners claims to be street vending.

2.

The counsel for the petitioners states that these petitions be also disposed of in terms of the order dated 301h October, 2014 of this Court in W.P.(C) No.7337/2014 titled Nagendra Yadav Vs. New Delhi Municipal Council.

Ak 3. This Court vide detailed order dated 301h June, 2015 in W.P.(C) No.6115/2015 titled Brahm Pal Vs. New Delhi Municipal Council and other connected petitions has observed that no purpose is being served in filing these petitions and that the petitions, if continue to be filed, shall be dismissed with costs.

4.

The counsel for the petitioners states that he was not aware of the said order, though has heard of the same.

5.

In that view of the matter, even though these petitions were filed on 3rd July, 2015 and re-filed on 6th July, 2015 i.e. after the order dated 30th June, 2015, but I am refraining from imposing any costs. 6.

All these petitions are disposed of in terms of the order dated 30th June, 2015 supra.

JULY 08, 2015/bs..

DLAW, J.

Page of 3