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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Ashok Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, EDMC - Respondent
W.P.(C) 1075 of 2021
Decided On : 29-01-2021




Procedural fairness requires that parties must be given a personal hearing before administrative actions, failing which the orders may be set aside.

Headnote:(A) High Court Rules - Procedural fairness - The petitioners challenged the order directing removal of an alleged illegal structure, arguing lack of personal hearing despite previous court directives. The High Court emphasized the necessity of a hearing before action and annulled the previous order for non-compliance. (Paras 3-7)

(B) Duty of Authorities - The court reiterated that compliance with procedural mandates is essential to ensure fairness and justice in administrative actions. (Paras 4-6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners have occupied the land in question for several decades and contested an order requiring removal of alleged encroachments without proper hearing.

Findings of Court:
The court set aside the order due to the absence of compulsory personal hearings mandated by earlier orders and remitted the matter for a proper hearing.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the petitioners were afforded the requisite personal hearing before the order of removal was issued.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that procedural fairness was violated as no personal hearing was provided, reaffirming the principle that parties must be heard before administrative actions are taken.

Result: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh hearing.

Table of Content
1. challenge to order for removal of structure. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioners' argument for lack of hearing. (Para 3 , 4 , 6)
3. court's observation on hearing requirement. (Para 5 , 7 , 8)
4. final order for hearings and application disposal. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)

CM APPL.2997/2021 (Exemption)

Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

W.P.(C) 1075/2021 & CM APPL.2998/2021

1. Petitioners impugn the order/letter dated 06.01.2021, whereby petitioners have been directed to remove the alleged illegal structure from the land in question within one month from the receipt of the notice.

2. Order dated 06.01.2021 states that the same is in compliance of directions contained in order dated 26.08.2019 in WP(C) 2365/2016 of the High Court.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners contends that each of the petitioners has been in occupation of the respective subject land for several decades. He further submits that by order dated 26.08.2019 in WP(C) 2365/2016, the Division Bench of this Court had directed the respondents to remove the encroachment in accordance with Law, Rules, Regulations and Government Policy, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the owners/occupiers of the super-structure.

4. Learned Senior Counsel submits though a show-cause notice was issued which was duly replied to, no hearing was afforded to any of the petitioners.

5. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents, under instructions, submits that the subject orders deal with the contentions of the petitioners as stated in their replies, however he concedes that no personal hearing was granted to the petitioners.

7. In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the order, since no personal hearing has been granted to the petitioners which was mandated by order dated 26.08.2019 in WP(C) 2365/2016, the impugned order is set aside.

8. The matter is remitted to the respondents for granting a hearing to the Petitioners consequent to the show-cause notice issued to them and thereafter to pass a fresh order.

9. It is expected that the proceedings shall be finalized by the respondents expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks from today.

10. All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved.

11. Petition along with pending applications are disposed of in the above terms.

12. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email by the Court Master.

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