Delhi High Court
Sandeep Gulati vs K S Mehra Commissioner Of Mcd & Anr on 23 May, 2011
Author: G. S. Sistani
68, 3, 4, 5 & 6
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW 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
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
[3] CONT.CAS(C) 335/2011
DARSHAN NAGPAL ..... 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
[4] CONT.CAS(C) 337/2011
SANDEEP KHURANA ..... 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
[5] CONT.CAS(C) 338/2011
HARISH KUMAR WASON ..... 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
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
ORDER
% 23.05.2011
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
