Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
D.N. Patel, Jyoti Singh, JJ.
Shahzad Ali - Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) - Respondent
W.P.(C) 3380 of 2022
Decided On : 24-02-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition exemption allowed. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. similar previous case supports petition. (Para 4) |
| 3. respondents to investigate grievances. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. writ petition disposed. (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
D.N. Patel, C.J. (ORAL)--Proceedings have been conducted through video conferencing.
CM APPL. 9876/2022 (Exemption)
2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
3. Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 3380/2022
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, at the outset, submits that a similar writ petition being W.P.(C) No.3332/2022 was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 23.02.2022, wherein certain directions were passed and urges that similar directions be passed in the present writ petition.
5. Since we have disposed of a similar writ petition, as aforementioned, we see no reason to entertain the present petition. Suffice it would be to reiterate that the concerned Respondents shall look into the grievances raised by the present Petitioner with regard to the alleged illegal construction and the decision shall be taken after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the stake-holders including the Petitioner herein.
6. Needless to state that in case the Respondents come to a conclusion that the construction in question is illegal or unauthorised, necessary action shall be taken in accordance with law.
7. With these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.
The court emphasized the need for proper grievance redressal regarding alleged illegal construction, aligning with decisions made in precedent cases.
Writ jurisdiction is not suitable for adjudicating disputed questions of fact regarding legality of construction; appropriate remedies must be pursued instead.
A party cannot seek relief in multiple forums for the same legal issue while suppressing pertinent facts, leading to dismissal of the appeal.
The legality of construction cannot be ascertained solely from documents; adequate evidence is essential for a writ court to adjudicate such matters.
When an unauthorized obstruction forming the basis of a writ petition is removed, the petition becomes infructuous and may be closed with liberty to relitigate should the grievance recur.
Vague allegations in a public interest litigation regarding unauthorized construction without cogent evidence are insufficient for judicial intervention, necessitating proper factual inquiries.
Where a statutory representation is pending before a local authority regarding alleged illegal acts, the High Court may direct the authority to hear all parties and pass orders without preemptively a....
The court emphasized timely administrative action against unauthorized construction, affirming the need for compliance with laws and regulations by municipal authorities.
Timely consideration of complaints regarding unauthorized constructions must respect due process and parties' rights.
Court dismisses writ petition as not pressed following petitioner's withdrawal.
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
