Dhiraj Bidhuri v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation And ORS

$~22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7159/2017, CM Nos. 34894/2017, 35429/2017 & 36381/2017 DHIRAJ BIDHURI ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sushil Kr. Jain, Mr. Parmod Kumar & Mr. Dhiraj Bidhuri, Advs.

versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Sri Harsha Peechara, Standing Counsel with Ms. Vidhi Jain, Adv. for SDMC along with Mr. V.K. Singh, Addl. Director Veterinary Dept.

Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel with Mr. Hem Kumar & Mr. Pritish Sabharwal, Advs.

Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, ASC (Civil), GNCTD

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

O R D E R

% 06.09.2018 With regard to the bona fide of the petitioner, the report of the Amicus Curiae submitted on 25.04.2018 is relevant. The extracts of the said report is reproduced herein as under:

"That the site was visited by amicus on 23.04.2018 and it was found that the land given for construction of the Veterinary Hospital (marked as 1) was being used for family functions/ W.P.(C) 7159/2017

private events of the petitioner. That the land behind and adjacent to the land marked as 1, which is meant for construction of dispensary and park, was being used as a vehicle parking space.

It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner organized the family functions/private events and was found on the premises of SDMC without any prior permissions of SDMC or district authorities and erected a shamiana with lighting arrangement for this event. (Photographs taken on 23.10.2018 is annexed and marked as (Annexure No.-2).

That the Community Centre located right next to the Veterinary Hospital is fully constructed. That despite the availability of the Community Centre the petitioner was found encroaching on the land of SDMC for his personal use. Further, the land allocated for dispensary and park was being used as parking space."

Keeping in view the report of the Amicus Curiae and factors indicated therein and taking note of the status report filed by the respondents, we are of the considered view that petitioner has vested interest in this Public Interest Litigation and therefore we are not inclined to interfere in the matter.

The writ petition along with pending applications stands dismissed. CHIEF JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO, J SEPTEMBER 06, 2018/ns W.P.(C) 7159/2017