( 1 ) BY this common order, I would be disposing of CW. NO. 6211/2001, filed by Shri Dharmik sabha as also CM. 1051/2001, filed in CW. 5288/2000 by the petitioner therein, Shri Dharmik Ramlila committee, as these relate to the issue of holding of Ramliia and dussehra functions at Mahavir Swami Park, Kailash nagar, Delhi.

( 2 ) FOR an appreciation of the controversy involved, some of the relevant facts may be noted:- cw. No. 5288/2000 had been filed by Shri dharmik Ramliia Committee, seeking allotment of the entire Mahavir Swami Park to the petitioner Society and for cancellation of the permission granted to respondent No. 4 i. e. Shri Dharmik Sabha for holding ramlila in half of the ground in the said park.

( 3 ) RULE was issued in CW. No. 5288/2000 on 27/9/2000. The learned Single Judge also disposed of cm. 8164/2000, filed by the petitioner seeking an order for holding the Ramliia celebrations in the entire ground and a prohibition on respondent No. 4 from holding parallel celebrations in half of the said park. The learned Single Judge disposed of the application permitting the Ramlila to be organised by the petitioner/dharmik Ramlila Committee under its management while respondent No. 4 was to provide all the artists for the smooth conduct of the Ramlila. Ramiila was directed to be organised in a spirit of cooperation by both the groups jointly.

( 4 ) THIS year again the petitioner moved an application CM. 1051/2001 in CW. No. 5288/2000, claiming that the petitioner Society had been holding such celebrations since 1987 and was thus entitled to hold the same as against respondent No. 4, which is a newly constituted society. Petitioner by the said application also sought directions to MCD to grant permission for holding of the celebrations and for a direction to cancel the alleged permission, granted to respondent No. 4, Shri Dharmik Sabha.

( 5 ) CW. NO. 6211/2001 has been filed by Shri dharmik Sabha, claiming that it had been duly granted permission on 20/9/2001, by the MCD to hold the Ramlila from 1/10/2001 to 30/10/2001. It is claimed that the petitioner Shri Dharmik Sabha is a duly registered society and has already conducted the Bhoomi Pujan in the presence of the Mayor of Delhi. Directions are sought in the writ petition to the Police Authorities to issue the "no-Objection" since it was one of the conditions of the permission granted by MCD. It may be noted that MCD also issued a communication dated 4/10/2001, stating that since the petitioner in cw. No. 6211/2001 Shri Dharmik Sabha, had failed to produce the "no-Objection" from the police, the permission granted has been revoked. It is the non-issuance of "no-Objection" by the Police authorities and the order of revocation which are sought to be assailed by the petitioner. Shri Dharmik ramlila Committee has also moved CM. 10857/2001 in cw. No. 6211/2001 for impleadment.

( 6 ) IT is in this background, I heard counsel for the parties at length. Counsel for Shri dharmik Ramlila Committee, Mr. J. K. Chawla, at the outset submitted that they are still willing to hold joint ramlila alongwith Shri Dharmik Sabha, respondent No. 4 in CW. No. 5288/2000 and petitioner in CW. No. 6211/2001. This Bench after hearing counsel for the parties, emphasised the desirability of eschewing differences on a matter like this. On 15/10/2001, counsel for the parties sought further time to arrive at an amicable settlement. Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, advocate, was requested to help and mediate in the matter.

( 7 ) AFTER hearing counsel for the parties and the office bearers of Shri Dharmik Ramlila committee and Shri Dharmik Sabha, I find that it is the desire to control and manage, fuelled by personal egos, which was coming in the way of holding Ramlila jointly and in a manner consistent with ethos of Hindu religion.

( 8 ) MR. J. K. CHAWLA, Ms. Kum Kum Jain and ms. Avnish Ahlawat, advocates, had put in their best endeavour to reconcile these differences. At once stage, it appeared that if