SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1980 Supreme(SC) 337

V.R.KRISHNA IYER, R.S.PATHAK, O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY
Nanhu: Gulab Singh – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Administration – Respondent


Advocates:
B.P.MAHESHVARI, K.PARASARAN ATTORNEY, R.S.Sharma, S.M.Ashri, Suresh Sethi

V.R. KRISHNA lYER, J.

(1) WE have disposed of today applications from cycle rickshaw pliers of Arnritsar Municipality where a scheme has been worked out to help them become owners of cycle rickshaws. A similar scheme, says the Solicitor-General appearing for the Delhi Administration, will be extended to the Delhi territory. We, therefore, annex a copy of the judgment in Writ Petition 839 of 1979 and 563 of 1979 - Azad Rickshaw Pullers Union, Arnritsar v. State of Punjab and Nanak Chand v. State of Punjab, respectively to this judgment.

(2) THERE is another problem which arises in these two cases and that is that the Delhi Administration has put a ceiling on the total number of cycle rickshaws permissible to be plied within its territory. Perhaps we do not know for certain this number may not accommodate all the applicants for cycle rickshaws applying (sic) licencees. We are told that apart from the applicants in this court under Article 32 of the Constitution, there are numerous petitioners who have approached the High court of Delhi under Article 226 of the Constitution and yet others who have filed suits in Civil courts for the same relief. All that we can do is to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top