Sandeep Gulati v. K S Mehra Commissioner of MCD & Anr

Delhi High Court · 23 May 2011 · 2011:DHC:2900
G. S. Sistani
CONT.CAS(C) 348/2011
2011:DHC:2900
administrative petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed contempt petitions against the MCD and Delhi Police for removing licensed catering vans before a final decision on re-location, granting liberty to raise all grounds in pending writ petitions.

Full Text
Translation output
68, 3, 4, 5 & 6 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CONT.CAS(C) 348/2011
SANDEEP GULATI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Manjit Singh Ahluwalia, Adv.
VERSUS
K S MEHRA COMMISSIONER OF MCD & ANR ..... Respondent
Through: Ms.Biji Rajesh for Mr.Gaurang Kanth, Advocate for respondent-MCD
Ms.Zeenat Masoodi for Mr.Nazmi Waziri, Advocate for respondent-GNCTD
[2] CONT.CAS(C) 334/2011 SHIV KUMAR ..... Petitioner
VERSUS
[3] CONT.CAS(C) 335/2011 DARSHAN NAGPAL ..... Petitioner
VERSUS
[4] CONT.CAS(C) 337/2011 SANDEEP KHURANA ..... Petitioner
2011:DHC:2900
VERSUS
[5] CONT.CAS(C) 338/2011 HARISH KUMAR WASON ..... Petitioner
VERSUS
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI O R D E R 23.05.2011
JUDGMENT

1. Pursuant to the licence granted by the MCD, petitioners were carrying on their business of catering vans/Chef carts. Facing threat of removal, writ petitions were filed by the petitioners, which were disposed of by order dated 07.05.2010. By the aforesaid order directions were issued to the MCD as also to the Delhi Traffic Police that till such time a final decision is taken in the matter with regard to re-location of the petitioners, petitioners shall not be removed. It is submitted that the traffic police has taken a decision that the petitioners cannot be permitted to carry on their CONT.CAS(C) Nos.348/2011, 334/2011, 335/2011, 337/2011 & CONT.CAS(C) 338/2011 2/3 trade and business at the present site on account of traffic congestion and 15 days time was granted to the petitioners to file their objections to the MCD.

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that although objections were filed before the MCD, final decision has not been taken, but in the meanwhile petitioners have been illegally removed in utter disregard to the order dated 07.05.2010.

3. Counsel for the MCD submits that the case of the petitioners shall be considered expeditiously, but for the moment the MCD has not renewed their licences.

4. Counsel for the petitioners submits that illegal action of the Delhi Police has been challenged by the petitioners by filing substantive writ petition(s) in which notice has been issued. Counsel for the petitioners also submits that without condoning the act of contempt of the respondents, petitioners wish to withdraw these petitions with liberty to raise all grounds raised in contempt petition, in the pending writ petition(s).

5. Accordingly, all the contempt petitions are dismissed, as not pressed. Liberty, as prayed for, is granted to the petitioners. DASTI. G.S. SISTANI, J. MAY 23, 2011 'ssn’ CONT.CAS(C) Nos.348/2011, 334/2011, 335/2011, 337/2011 & CONT.CAS(C) 338/2011 3/3