Dada Maldev Gramin Vikas Samiti ... vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors
2014 Latest Caselaw 6201 Del

$~25.
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      W.P.(C) No.8240/2014
       DADA MALDEV GRAMIN VIKAS SAMITI VILLAGE
       DARYAPUR KALAN                                 ..... Petitioner
                        Through: Mr. R.K. Sharma with Ms. Dezy
                                 Gaur, Mr. S.K. Rout, Mr. Pramod
                                 Kumar and Mr. Syed Mohd. Mehdi,
                                 Advs.
                                    Versus
    GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.                      ..... Respondents
                      Through: Ms. Nidhi Raman, Adv. for GNCTD.
CORAM :-
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
                               ORDER

% 26.11.2014 CM No.19157/2014 (for condonation of 24 days delay in re-filing).

1. For the reasons stated in the application, delay in re-filing the petition is condoned.

W.P.(C) No.8240/2014.

2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India flags the

issue, undoubtedly of public importance, of the respondent i.e. the

Government of NCT of Delhi inspite of the newly constructed building of

Updesh Kaur Sarvadaya Kanya Vidalaya situated at Village Daryapur Kalan

having been found to be unsafe owing to the poor quality of construction

thereof, from time to time carrying out repairs only therein, endangering the

lives of the children studying in the said school and the staff working

therein. The petition seeks directions for demolition of the school building

and for immediate reconstruction thereof and initiation of an inquiry against

those guilty of such poor quality unsafe construction.

3. The documents particularly the photographs of the school building

filed with the petition indeed shocked our conscience and we feared for the

safety of the young children studying in the said school. The counsel for the

petitioner also opened his argument dramatically by contending that the

Government and the Governmental Agencies have made a habit of inspite of

warning, allowing a tragedy to unfold and owing to lethargy and red tapism

not taking preventive steps.

4. However we found that the petitioner in the petition, save for stating

that the said school is a 'recognized' school, had not disclosed whether it is a

private aided school or a private unaided school or a Government school or a

Municipal school and has also not made the school a party. Since the

directions sought and to be issued depend on the said factors, we enquired of

the same from the counsel. However the counsel himself was unaware and

only after much consultation, tentatively stated that the school is a

Government school.

5. Be that as it may, the counsel for the respondent appearing on advance

notice confirmed that it is a school of the Delhi Government. It was also

informed that the school is not functional from the subject premises /

building, which has been cordoned off owing to being unsafe / dangerous

and the children and staff have been shifted to another school of the

Government of NCT of Delhi about 20 mtrs. away.

6. The counsel for the petitioner does not dispute.

7. However the said fact, though of prior to the filing of the petition, is

not disclosed in the petition. On the contrary what is portrayed is as if owing

to the school being allowed to continue to function from such unsafe /

dangerous building, the safety of the children and the staff is at peril. We fail

to understand why a factually wrong picture was painted.

8. In view of the above, we do not feel the need to entertain this petition

and dismiss the same, cautioning the petitioner to in future, if filing another

petition in public interest, make factually correct and precise pleadings.

CHIEF JUSTICE

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

NOVEMBER 26, 2014/'pp'..