Neeta Bhardwaj vs Kamlesh Sharma

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Del) 1882

PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Neeta Bhardwaj – Appellant
Versus
Kamlesh Sharma – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Paul Kumar Kalai, Mr. Kaoliangpou Kamei and Mr. Lhingdeihat Chongloi, Advocates., for the Appellants; Ms. Shilpa Goel, Advocate,, for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 & 6; Mr. Nitin Jain, Advocate., for the Shopkeepers; Mr. Deepak Dewan, Advocate., for the 8 Shopkeepers; Mr. Rajmangal Kumar, Advocate., for the Applicant in CM Appl. 42041/2022; Ms. Samapika Biswal & Mr. Aman Kumar Yadav, Mr. Karan Jeet & Mr. Rai Sharma, Advocates. Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel with Inspector Balbir Singh, SHO PS Kalkaji & ASI Arvind Kumar, for the Ld. Administrator

JUDGMENT

Prathiba, M. Singh, J. (Oral) - This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

CM APPL.42042/2022 (for exemption)

2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM APPL.42042/2022 is disposed of.

CM APPL.42041/2022 (for modification)

3. Vide previous order dated 9th September, 2022, this Court had noted the progress of the redevelopment of the Kalkaji Mandir and passed comprehensive directions, with the inputs of all stakeholders. Considering that the construction of all temporary shops had been completed, the Court had further directed that the same may be allotted, so that no temporary table arrangements would be required for the upcoming Navratas. It had also directed that status quo as to the entry and exit routes to the Mandir shall continue, as there were differing contentions by the parties in this regard.

4. Today, CM APPL.42041/2022 has been filed on behalf of ten shopkeepers, seeking permission to install temporary tables in the Kalkaji Mandir premises during the Navratra period, since allotment of temporary shops would take time.

5. A short report dated 22nd September, 2022 (hereinafter 'Short Report') has also been filed by the ld. Administrator, which raises certain