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

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


Table of Content
1. court's monitoring of encroachment management (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. concerns raised about police treatment of devotees (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
3. directions for ensuring safety and order at mandir (Para 9 , 14)
4. illegal occupancy and encroachment by shopkeepers (Para 12 , 13)
5. misconduct allegations against baridaars (Para 19)
6. need for basic amenities for devotees (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 28 , 29 , 30)
7. establishment of dedicated redevelopment fund (Para 32 , 33 , 34)
8. fire safety audit mandated for mandir premises (Para 37 , 38)
9. pending cases to be consolidated in future hearing (Para 40 , 41 , 48)

JUDGMENT

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

2. These matters pertain to the Kalkaji Mandir, which this Court has been hearing from time to time.

3. On the last date i.e., 27th October 2021, it was submitted by Mr. Vipin Bharadwaj, one of the baridaars, that the police are not providing complete cooperation for the removal of encroachments and the management of devotees for darshan in accordance with the order of this Court dated 27th September 2021. Accordingly, this Court had directed Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crimin

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top