Resident Welfare Association, Kalkaji Extension v. Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 01 Oct 2013 · 2013:DHC:7664-DB
Pradeep Nandrajog; V. Kameswar Rao
W.P.(C) 5471/2013
2013:DHC:7664-DB
administrative appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed writ petitions challenging MPD-2021 provisions as not pressed, granting liberty to file fresh petitions after detailed study.

Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 5471/2013
RESIDENT WELFARE ASSOCIATION, KALKAJI EXTENSION ..... Petitioner
Mr.Rakesh Kumar,Mr.Maneesh Arora and Mr.Prabhat Kaushik, Advocates
Represented by:
VERSUS
DELID DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. ..... Respondents
Mr.Ajay Verma, Adv.for DDA
W.P.(C) 5383/2013
RESIDENT WELFARE ASSOCIATION, KALKAJI EXTENSION ..... Petitioner
Mr.Rakesh Kumar,Mr.Maneesh Arora and Mr.Prabhat Kaushik, Advocates
Represented by:
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Sweety Manchanda, Adv.
Adv. for R-1 Mr.Ajay Verma, Adv.for DDA
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
ORDER o/o 01.10.2013
JUDGMENT

1. Conceding to the point that the averments in the writ petitions are akin to bubble.pleadings and there is no reflection of an in depth study of W.P.(C) 5471/2013 & W.P.(C) 5383/2013 Pg.[1] of[2] 2013:DHC:7664-DB,~ ' paragraph 4 and its various sub-paragraphs of MPD-2021, counsel for the petitioner(s) on instructions from Shri Jai Prakash, who is the President of Resident Welfare Association Pocket A-14 Kalkaji Extension seeks leave to withdraw these writ petitions with right reserved to file a fresh writ petition(s) on the same cause.

2. We have explained to Shri Jai Prakash, President of the petitioner association that it would be advisable to take the help of an architect to understand paragraph 4 of the MPD-2021 with reference to the density norms and in particular pertaining to the in-situ rehabilitation of Slum and JJ Dwellers as per paragraph 4.[1] thereof.

3. Liberty granted as prayed for.

4. The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed as not pressed.

5. No costs. CM No.12214/2013 in W.P.(C) 547112013 CM No.12045/2013 in W.P.(C) 5383/2q13 Dismissed as infructuous.,, --,--:-r---/4~ PRADEEP NANJj~JOG, J. ~~

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J.

OCTOBER 01, 2013 Mm