Delhi High Court
Vedpal & Anr vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 8 November, 2019
$~27
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 08 November, 2019
+ W.P.(C) 11764/2019
VEDPAL & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Hitesh Sachar and Ms. Riya
Dhingra, Advs. with petitioner no.
1 in person
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Garima Prashad, Standing
Counsel for respondent no. 2
Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, Standing
Counsel for respondent no. 4
Mr. Ajjay Aroraa and Mr. Kapil
Dutta, Advs. for NDMC
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
ORDER
% 08.11.2019
D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)
CM Appl. No.48312/2019 (exemption)
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) No. 11764/2019
1. This so-called Pubic Interest Litigation (PIL) has been preferred
with the following prayers:-
"a) Appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus, thereby directing the Respondent No. 2 to 4
to install street lights in Rural Areas, Extended Abadis
and unauthorized colonies on the existing poles without
lights and also installations of new poles for street lights
wherever necessary.
b) Direct the Respondent No. 1 to allow and permit the
Respondent No.2 to 4 to install street lights on existing
poles without lights in Rural areas, Extended Abadis
and unauthorized colonies and to allocate adequate and
appropriate budget and to utilize the Nirbhaya Fund
specially created by Government of India towards safety
of women which includes lighting of dark spots.
c) Direct the Respondents No. 2 to 4 perform their
Obligatory functions as per provisions of Section 42 of
Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957.
d) Pass such other and further order which the Hon'ble
court may deem fit and proper in the fact and
circumstances of the above case;"
2. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the
facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this is not a "Public
Interest Litigaton" at all but in fact this is a "Publicity Interest Litigation".
Not a single specific area has been mentioned, where the lights are to be
installed. General allegations have been made in this writ petition that
respondents have not installed street lights at several places in Delhi but
not mentioned any specific place, which the petitioner could have pointed
out. Not even a single photograph has been annexed with the writ
petition depicting any place, where lights should be installed. There are
vague and general allegations covering the whole city of Delhi. Such
directions, as prayed above, cannot be given by this Court. Even
otherwise, the petitioners are Municipal Councilors of South Delhi
Municipal Corporation. Moreover, the petitioners, being Municipal
Councilors themselves, can always raise these grievances before the
concerned Municipal Corporation.
Pleadings in the writ petition are absolutely vague. Further, in
general, looking to the city of Delhi, there are enough street lights. Thus,
if any specific instance is brought out, remedial action can be initiated by
the concerned respondent. Nonetheless, we hereby direct the respondents
to look into the grievances ventilated by the petitioners and if there is any
requirement to provide the street lights in the particular area, the same
will be provided by the respondents in accordance with law, rules,
regulations and Government policy.
3. With these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE
C.HARI SHANKAR, J.
NOVEMBER 08, 2019
r.bararia
