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

2023 Supreme(Del) 1174

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Yogesh Gaur & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
The Ld. Principal District And Sessions Judge East District & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 1782 of 2021 and CM APPL. 5125 of 2021
Decided On : 13-03-2023

Advocates appeared:
Petitioner in person.
Mr. Satyakam, ASC with Ms. Pallavii Singh, Advocate, for the Respondent-1.

Entitlement to chamber allotment is determined by specific relatives as outlined in the District Court Shahdara Lawyers (Allotment and Occupancy) Rules, 1995.

Headnote:

Chamber Allotment - Dispute over Chamber Allotment - District Court Shahdara Lawyers (Allotment and Occupancy) Rules, 1995 - Rules 5(b) - Summary: The petitioners seek quashing of the proclamation notice dated 21st January, 2021, regarding the possession of a chamber. They claim entitlement to the chamber as the nephews of the deceased allottee, while the respondents argue that only the father, mother, son, daughter, husband, or wife of the deceased are entitled to the allotment. The court directs the Chamber Allotment Committee to consider the case of the petitioners for transfer of the allotment and orders a physical inspection of the chambers to investigate serious allegations of misuse and unauthorized occupancy.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, practicing advocates, seek quashing of a proclamation notice regarding the possession of a chamber previously allotted to their deceased uncle. They claim entitlement to the chamber as his nephews, while the respondents argue that only specific relatives are entitled to the allotment.

Finding of the Court:

The court directs the Chamber Allotment Committee to consider the case of the petitioners for transfer of the allotment and orders a physical inspection of the chambers to investigate serious allegations of misuse and unauthorized occupancy.

Issues: Dispute over entitlement to chamber allotment, alleged misuse and unauthorized occupancy of chambers.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision is based on the interpretation of the District Court Shahdara Lawyers (Allotment and Occupancy) Rules, 1995, specifically Rule 5(b) which outlines the entitlement to the allotment of a deceased allottee's chamber.

Final Decision: The court directs the Chamber Allotment Committee to consider the case of the petitioners for transfer of the allotment and orders a physical inspection of the chambers to investigate serious allegations of misuse and unauthorized occupancy.

JUDGMENT

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

2. The present petition has been filed by two Petitioners, Mr. Yogesh Gaur-Petitioner No.1, and Mr. Praveen Gaur-Petitioner No.2, who are practicing advocates in the Karkardooma Courts. By way of the present petition, the Petitioners seek quashing of the proclamation notice dated 21st January, 2021 by which it was proclaimed that the possession of Chamber No. D-210 vested with the Principal and Sessions Judge East District, Karkardooma Court Complex, Delhi.

3. It is their case that their uncle (Chacha)-Mr. Surender Kumar Sharma was the allottee of chamber no. D-210, Block-E Second Floor, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi (hereinafter `subject chamber') who passed away on 1st November, 2021. The Petitioners' uncle was unmarried and he died intestate and issueless. It is submitted by Petitioner No.1, who appears in person, that, since inception i.e., 2009 and 2014, the Petitioners were working with their uncle and after his demise, have taken over his practice. Various documents, including ration card, have been placed on record to show that the Petitioners' family and their uncle lived together as a joint family right till the demise of the uncle. He submits that the Petitioners would be severely impacted in their professional career if the chamber allotted to their uncle is not allotted to them after his demise.

4. It is also alleged that the attempt to dispossess the Petitioners from the chamber is also mala fide inasmuch as in the Karkardooma Courts Complex several chambers are being misused. Paragraph 11 of the writ petition mentions the nature of allegations and the alleged activity being carried out in the chambers inside the Karkardooma Courts. The said paragraph is extracted below:

    "11....It is most pertinent to mention here that there are a number of chambers in the karkardooma court complex which are still laying vacant and unclaimed for a number of years after the death of the original allottee(s) of those chambers because of an ILLEGAL NEXUS between some corrupt and cunning nature employees serving in the General Branch, Care Taking Branch and other offices or branches responsible for administration and maintenance of the entire Court Premises including the Lawyers Chambers Block Karkardooma Courts Complex AND some non-practising advocates who are illegally occupying those vacant and unclaimed chambers and using them to run various types of unlawful activities like selling and consuming liquor organising gambling up to late night hours and commercial activities of selling and purchasing goods, selling tea and other eatables, installing Photostat Machines, Providing mobile recharging, electricity and water bill depositing facilities, etc. It is most pertinent to mention here that some of the vacant and unclaimed chambers have been given on rent to some young lawyers and the rent is being charged, collected, extracted, received and distributed amongst them in form of money, liquor and other gift articles by those corrupt and cunning nature employees and some non-practising advocates as aforesaid. Such corrupt employees keep the concerned responsible officer or authority or The District and Sessions Judge, In-charge/Chairperson in dark by not providing and concealing the real status of such vacant and unclaimed chambers to them rather they misguide the authority concerned by providing manipulated information based on pick and choose policy and the self-concocted story. They are letting out the said vacant and unclaimed chambers and receiving the money from them in form of rent from alleged occupiers. Therefore the eligible advocates are deprived of the chamber facility. On the other hand such occupiers are misusing the said chamber by running commercial activities as aforesaid in those chambers which are prohibited according to District Courts Karkardooma Lawyers Chamber (Allotment and Occupancy) Rules 1995 (Amended) and other relevant laws

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 Back to top