Karuna Raj Vadehra And Ors. vs Municipal Corportion Of Delhi And ...
1992 Latest Caselaw 646 Del

JUDGMENT

D.P. Wadhwa, J.

(1) This petition was listed before us yesterday and we required the petitioners to file photographs of the alleged construction which they say respondent M.C.D. was going to demolish. This alleged construction was stated to be in the shape of pavement in the verandah in front of the shop of the petitioners. One set of these photographs has since been brought on record. When we see pavement in front of the shop of the petitioners we find that it has been raised in height than the pavements in front of the neighbouring shops. It is like a half step on both sides. We find there is a market established in South Extension 0+3 Part Ii and there is a verandah in front of all the shops running throughout its length for the use of the shoppers and others. The verandah has to be even and smooth throughout its length. If any shopkeeper raises the height of the pavement of the verandah in front of his shop that is likely to cause injuries to the people who use the verandah. One may break his ankle or suffer a fall and break even his or her knee. Moreover, in this writ jurisdiction we are not inclined to interfere in such like matters. The petitioners are at liberty to file a civil suit if so advised.

(2) Dismissed.