Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
D.N.PATEL, JASMEET SINGH
Prem Pal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. video conferencing proceedings and exemptions (Para 1 , 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. public interest litigation prayers (Para 4) |
| 3. assessment of alleged illegal construction (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. dismissal of public interest litigation (Para 8) |
| 5. order for costs and further action (Para 9 , 10) |
1. Proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
C.M.No.8087/2021 (exemptions)
2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
3. The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.2712/2021
4. This so called public interest litigation has been preferred with the following prayers:-
"(A) Issue of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other similar writ, order or direction directing Respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 to take immediate and stern steps, measures and efforts to make sure that no illegal construction is taking place in Freedom Fighter Colony of Neb Sarai Area in South Delhi;
(B) Issue of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other similar writ, order or direction, directing Respondents No. 4 and 5 to immediately restrain and refrain from providing electricity and water connection t
Proof of illegality in construction must be supported by substantive evidence; mere presence of construction materials is insufficient.
A public interest litigation must be substantiated with credible evidence and involve necessary parties; failure to do so may result in dismissal.
Public Interest Litigation requires proper standing and evidence; a petitioner must join affected parties and cannot solely rely on hearsay.
Public interest litigation is not applicable when targeting a specific property owned by an individual, and separate legal actions must be pursued for such disputes.
Lack of evidence, ground work, and public interest element in a public interest litigation may lead to the dismissal of the petition and imposition of costs on the petitioner.
Writ jurisdiction is not suitable for adjudicating disputed questions of fact regarding legality of construction; appropriate remedies must be pursued instead.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
