R P Gupta v. Union of India & Ors.

1. When the matter is called out, nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner.

2. We have heard counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 11.

3. This Public Interest Litigation has been preferred with the following prayers: 2019:DHC:5431-DB “a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or similar writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing an investigation to be conducted against the Respondent NO. 11' and/or b) Issue a writ, order or a direction n the nature of Mandamus thereby directing the Revenue Department to provide clarification as to how they have allowed such illegal acts with respect to Registration of Commercial Properties as residential, thereby causing loss to the exchequer; and/or c) Issue such other appropriate Writ or an order or direction as this Hon'ble court deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstances of the case; and/or d) Award costs of the writ in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondents.”

4. Having heard learned counsel for the respondents and looking to the status report filed by the respondents, it appears that the vigilance inquiry is going on against the Respondent No.11. All arguments in this writ petition are against the Respondent No.11 who has registered several sale deeds.

5. As the inquiry is going on against Respondent No.11, we hereby direct the concerned respondent authority to complete the inquiry as early as possible and practicable in accordance with law, rules, regulations, Government policy applicable to the facts of the case, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard. After inquiry, in case any action is required to be taken against Respondent No.11, the same shall be taken by the concerned respondent authority in accordance with law.

6. With these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.

CHIEF JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR, J. OCTOBER 22, 2019