New Waqt Club(Regd) vs State (Govt Of Nct, Delhi) & Ors
2013 Latest Caselaw 4548 Del

        *       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                       Date of Decision: 01.10.2013

+       W.P.(C) 4871/2013 & CM 11802/2013 & CM 12471/2013
        NEW WAQT CLUB(REGD)
                                                      ..... Petitioner
                         Through: Mr. R.K. Bali, Adv.

                          versus

        STATE (GOVT OF NCT, DELHI) & ORS
                                                        ..... Respondent
                          Through:   Mr. V.K. Tandon and Mr. Yogesh
                                     Saini, Advs. for R-6
                                     Ms. Zubeda Begum and Ms. Sana
                                     Ansari, Advs. for R-1,3 to 5
                                     Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Standing
                                     Counsel for R-2/DUSIB
        CORAM:
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN

V.K. Jain, J. (Oral)

The petitioner before this Court was desirous of organizing Ramlila & Dussehra Mela at Ramlila Ground near Kalamandir Cinema, Mangol Puri, Delhi-110083. The petitioner applied for requisite permission to use the said ground to organize Ramlila & Dussehra Mela in the year 2012. The said permission having not been granted, he filed W.P(C) No.6127/2012. The aforesaid writ petition came to be dismissed as infructuous vide order dated 9.7.2013 noticing that since we are already in the year 2013, the petitioner if it wants permission to hold Ramlila & Dussehra Mela at the aforesaid venue during the year 2013,

will have to apply to the concerned respondent seeking permission in this regard and only in the event such permission being refused he can approach this Court by way of a writ petition.

2. Vide letter dated 10.7.2013, the petitioner sought permission for organizing Ramlila & Dussehra Mela at the aforesaid venue from 15.9.2013 to 25.10.2013. The said request was declined vide communication dated 18.7.2013 on the ground that the aforesaid venue was not available. Being aggrieved from denial of permission to it and grant of permission to another club, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:

a) set aside the impugned order dated 18.7.2013 passed by the respondent no.2 as from the rejection order the malafide intention of the respondent no.2 is crystal clear and the petitioner apprehends that the respondent no.2 may has granted permission to some other person/ organization and in case some permission is granted by the respondent no.2 to some person or organization then, this Hon'ble Court is requested to cancel that permission which the petitioner apprehends and respondent no.2 may be directed to grant permission to the petitioner's Society for the year 2013; and

b) respondent no.3 to 5 may also be directed to grant the necessary and requisite permission timely to the petitioner's society so that, the petitioner's society may conduct Ramlila and Dusshera mela for the year 2013, in the interest of justice.

3. A perusal of the letter dated 3.7.2013 issued by the respondent no.2- Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board to the President of respondent no.6 - Mangolpuri Waqt Club would show that pursuant to a letter dated 3.6.2013 received from the said club, the aforesaid venue was allowed to be used by respondent no.6 for holding Ramlila & Dussehra Mela subject to the condition stipulated in the said letter including deposit of rent/ charges as and when demanded by the department on the pattern of other land owning agencies such as MCD, NDMC etc and further subject to the organizer obtaining permission /NOC from the Delhi Police/MCD/ Fire Department etc.

4. Since the aforesaid venue is no more available for being permitted to be used by the petitioner for holding Ramlila & Dussehra Mela between 20.9.2013 to 19.10.2013, no relief in the present writ petition can be given to it.

5. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondents were acting under pressure from the higher-ups in allowing use of the aforesaid ground by respondent no.6 since last year also the application of the petitioner seeking permission to use the said venue was declined without any justification. However, there is no material on record to substantiate the contention being advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It would be seen from a perusal of the permission dated 3.7.2013 that respondent no.6 sought permission to use the said ground on 3.6.2013 whereas the petitioner applied only on 10.7.2013 i.e. more than one month after the permission was sought by respondent no.6. In fact, the said ground had already been permitted to

be used by respondent no.6 by the time the petitioner sought permission to use it for holding Ramlila & Dussehra Mela functions.

In these circumstances, I find no illegality or arbitrariness on the part of the respondents in granting permission to respondent no.6 to use the aforesaid venue.

The writ petition is devoid of any merit and is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

V.K. JAIN, J OCTOBER 01, 2013/rd