Parents Teacher Association of PP International School v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr

Delhi High Court · 20 Jan 2025 · 2025:DHC:309
Manoj Jain
W.P.(C) 711/2025
2025:DHC:309
administrative other

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court directed the DDA to reconsider its revocation of emergency gate usage permission granted to a school after hearing all parties, treating the writ petition as a representation.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 711/2025 1
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 20th January, 2025
W.P.(C) 711/2025 & CM APPL. 3521/2025 & CM APPL. 3522/2025
PARENTS TEACHER ASSOCIATION OF PP INTERNATIONAL
SCHOOL THROUGH MS. HARPREET KAUR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ajjay Aroraa, Sr. Advocate
WITH
Mr. Kartik Kumar and Mr. Nitish Dubey, Advocates.
VERSUS
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. R.K. Dhawan, Standing Counsel for DDA
WITH
Ms. Nisha Dhawan, Mr. V.K. Teng and Mr. Naman Kumar Thakur, Advocates for respondent No.1.
Ms. Jyoti Taneja, Advocate for respondent No.2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
JUDGMENT
(oral)

1. Petitioner is the ‘Parents Teacher Association’ of PP International School situated at Pitampura, Delhi.

2. According to the petitioner Association, there is one public park adjacent to the school.

3. There is one gate in the boundary wall touching both the premises i.e. the school and the above said public park. Such gate is used by school only in case of evacuation related emergency. It is submitted that as per the recent decision taken by DDA, the above said permission has been recalled and they have, thus, denied the use of the W.P.(C) 711/2025 2 above said gate by the school, even when there is any such acute emergency.

4. Reference in this regard has been made to the communication dated 06.01.2025 sent by Horticulture Division of DDA to the school.

5. Learned counsel for respondent No.1/DDA and learned counsel for respondent No.2/PP International School appear on advance notice and accept notice.

6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/PP International School also submits that the facility of above said gate should not have been recalled, while reiterating that such gate would be used only when there is an acute emergency like evacuation and said gate would not be used for general access to the school.

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 DDA submits that he would have no objection if the present writ petition is directed to be treated as a representation. He submits that DDA would consider the same after hearing the representatives of the school as well as of the petitioner and would take appropriate decision and the same would also be communicated to them.

8. The above said proposal is aggreable to learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.2.

9. In view of the above and without prejudice to rights and contentions of any of the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction that the averments made in the present writ petition shall be taken as a representation and shall be considered by DDA after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner Association as well as to the respondent No.2 School. W.P.(C) 711/2025 3

10. Keeping in mind the urgency cited, let DDA decide the same as expeditiously as possible and, preferably, within a period of six weeks from today.

11. The petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms.

JUDGE JANUARY 20, 2025