Sham Laat Patti Rayal Sangharsh Samiti v. Directorate Of Education

$~7 & 8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 601/2015, C.M. APPL.18478/2015 + C.M. APPL.12383/2015 & 11980/2017 IN W.P.(C) 6786/2015 SHAM LAAT PATTI RAYAL SANGHARSH SAMITI..... Petitioner versus DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION ..... Respondent Through : Sh. Rajat Aneja and Ms. Nisha Sharma, Advocates, for petitioner, in Item Nos. 7 and 8. Sh. Sumeet Pushkarna, Sh. Devanshu Lahiry and Sh. N.K. Sharma, Advocates, for DJB, in Item No.7.

Ms. Niharika Ahluwalia and Ms. Avanthika, Singh, Advocates, for DDA, in Item No.7.

Sh. Rahul Keshav and Sh. Pushkar Sood, Advocates, for DMRC, in Item No.7.

Sh. Ankur Chhibber, Advocate, for GNCTD, in Item Nos. 7 and 8.

Sh. Yeeshu Jain and Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates, for L&B, in Item Nos. 7 and 8.

Sh. Mukesh Gupta, Advocate, for MCD, in Item Nos.7 & 8.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 12.04.2018 LPA 601/2015 The writ petitioner's grievance is that the learned Single Judge issued notice only with respect to one claim made in the writ petition. It is contended that the limited notice has resulted in dismissal of the writ petition with respect to the other claim which ought to have been appropriately done at the final stage.

Learned counsel for the respondent opposes the submission and states that there is no merit in the appeal and the land in respect of which direction was sought was acquired. It is also stated that the petitioner did not challenge the order dated 26.06.2015 which was made during the pendency of the proceedings. The Registry shall ensure that the counter affidavit filed in the appeal is treated as part of the record in W.P.(C) 6786/2015. It is open to the other respondents to file counter affidavits/replies in that writ petition. This Court notices that the appeal has been pending for the last three years during the course of which the records of the W.P.(C) 6786/2015 (in which the initial order was appealed against) has also been listed before the Court.

For the sake of convenience and simplicity, the Court is of the opinion that the order dated 26.06.2015 to the extent it restricts the scope of the writ petition needs to be recalled. It is accordingly set aside. During the course of the proceedings in LPA 601/2015, the Court had thought it appropriate to implead Respondent Nos. 2-5. Since we are now disposing of that appeal and the matter really pertains to proceedings in the writ petition, the said parties, i.e. Respondent Nos.2-6, impleaded during the course of the proceedings, i.e. DDA, SDMC, DJB, DMRC and L&B Department, GNCTD shall be treated as impleaded in W.P.(C) 6786/2015. Since those parties are present here, they shall be treated as party respondents in W.P.(C) 6786/2015.

In the light of the above discussion, LPA 601/2015 is disposed of with a request to the learned Single Judge to deal with the writ petition expeditiously.

W.P.(C) 6786/2015 shall now be listed before the concerned learned Single Judge according to roster allocation. He is requested to proceed and preferably deal with the writ petition expeditiously. The parties shall be present before the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 6786/2015 on 25.04.2018.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J A. K. CHAWLA, J APRIL 12, 2018/AJK