Akshay Kumar Jain v. Bhagwati CGHS & Ors.

1. On the last date of hearing, counsel for petitioner was directed to place on record a copy of the order dated 31.8.2004, passed in WP(C)No.2199/2003. The said order has not been filed. Instead, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he had to file a copy of the order dated 2.8.2005 passed in WP(C)No.10066/2004. He hands over a copy of the said order, which is taken on record. He also states that he has filed a copy of the order dated 10.12.2004 passed in the very same petition.

2. We have enquired from learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the petitioner has raised a grievance as raised in the present petition, before the respondent No.3/RCS or the respondent No.4/DDA. The reply to both the queries is in the negative. 2017:DHC:3648 W.P.(C) 5701/2017

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he may be permitted to withdraw the present petition, while reserving the right of the petitioner to raise the grievance as raised in the present petition, before the respondent No.3/RCS and respondent No.4/DDA.

4. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 & 2, who appears on advance notice, states that the petitioner’s apprehension that the respondent No.1/Society is proposing to sell, transfer or alienate the subject flats in the Society without the Office of the RCS conducting a verification of the members, is unfounded and no such steps shall be taken by the respondent No.1/Society till the said list is verified by the respondent No.3/RCS and accepted by the respondent No.4/DDA.

5. While recording the submissions made herein above by the learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2, the present petition is disposed of, along with the pending applications. If the grievance of the petitioner still survives, liberty is granted to him to seek his legal remedies before the appropriate forum. HIMA KOHLI, J DEEPA SHARMA, J JULY 18, 2017 sk/rkb