Delhi High Court
Geeta Jeena vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi, & Ors. on 20 July, 2020
SINDHU KRISHNAKUMAR
21.07.2020 16:26
$~9, 12 to 17
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 20th July, 2020
+ W.P. (C) 4302/2020 & CM. APPLs. 15477-79/2020, 15697/2020
AFSHANA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Mehmood Pracha and Mr. Jatin
Bhatt, Advocates.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, Standing
Counsel GNCTD.
With
+ W.P.(C) 3643/2020 & CM. APPLs. 12987-89/2020, 15655-56/2020
MS. KAJAL & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Himanshu Pathak, Advocate.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, Standing
Counsel GNCTD.
With
+ W.P.(C) 3733/2020 & CM. APPL. 13364/2020
SMT. GEETA JEENA ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Seema Bengani. Advocate.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, Standing
Counsel GNCTD.
With
+ W.P.(C) 3742/2020 & CM. APPLs. 13416-18/2020
SURENDER PAWAR ..... Petitioner
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PRATHIBA M SINGH W.P.(C) 4302/2020 & connected matters Page 1 of 6
Signing Date:21.07.2020 12:57
Through: Mr. Anshuman Upadhyay, Advocate.
versus
THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORT CUM CHAIRMAN
DELHI TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, Standing
Counsel GNCTD.
With
+ W.P.(C) 3779/2020 & CM. APPLs. 13520-24/2020
UMESH KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Ms. Seema Bengani. Advocate.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH ITS CHIEF
SECRETARY & ORS. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, Standing
Counsel GNCTD.
With
+ W.P.(C) 3781/2020 & CM. APPLs. 13527-32/2020
GEETA JEENA ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Seema Bengani. Advocate.
versus
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI, & ORS. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, Standing
Counsel GNCTD.
And
+ W.P.(C) 3803/2020 & CM. APPL. 13633/2020
SUNIL KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ajay Jain, Advocate.
versus
DELHI TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION LTD. (AN ENTERPRISES OF GOVT. OF NCT
OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, Standing
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:PRATHIBA M SINGH W.P.(C) 4302/2020 & connected matters Page 2 of 6
Signing Date:21.07.2020 12:57
Counsel GNCTD.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done by video conferencing.
2. All these matters pertain to shops allotted to various licensees at the
Inter-State Bus Terminals - Kashmere Gate, Anand Vihar and Sarai Kale
Khan. Broadly, the Petitioners can be classified into three categories:
a) Category 1: Petitioners to whom allotments have been made, however,
possession of the shops at various ISBT terminals has not been handed
over and the license agreements are yet to be executed.
b) Category 2: Petitioners who were granted licenses for a period of three
years and who are currently in possession of the shops in the various
ISBT terminals.
c) Category 3: Petitioners who were granted licenses for a period of six
months and who have either sought or have been granted extension and
are currently in possession of the shops in the various ISBT terminals.
3. Except in W.P.(C) 4302/2020, the Delhi Transport Infrastructure
Development Corporation (hereinafter, "DTIDC") has filed its counter
affidavit in all matters, along with annexures. All the Petitioners wish to file
rejoinders. Let the rejoinders be filed within two weeks.
4. In W.P.(C) 4302/2020, issue notice. Mr. Gautam Narayan, ld. Counsel
accepts notice.
5. The submission of Mr. Narayan, is that insofar as Category 1 allottees
are concerned, he has been instructed to submit that the Board of DTIDC
has decided to not charge license fee from such allottees, since they are yet
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:21.07.2020 12:57
to be handed over possession of the shops during the lockdown period when
inter-state operation of buses is suspended. However, insofar as Category 2
and Category 3 allottees are concerned, DTIDC's stand is that no waiver can
be granted. Ld. counsel relies upon the judgments in Ramanand and Ors. v.
Girish Soni and Ors. [RC REV 447/17, decided on 21.05.2020] and
Gaurav Jain v. UOI & Anr. [WP© 3519/2020, decided on 15.06.2020].
6. Mr. Pathak, ld. Counsel appearing in W.P.(C) 3643/2020, where the
Petitioners belong to Category 1, submits that if no license fee is charged
from the Petitioners till inter-state bus operations resume, the relief sought
for is in effect granted by DTIDC. Accordingly, he submits that the writ
petition itself can be disposed of. In response, Mr. Narayan, ld. counsel
submits that he would like to place on record the minutes of DTIDC's Board
Meeting along with an affidavit so that the same can be taken on record.
7. Ld. counsel for the Petitioners also submit that insofar as ISBT,
Kashmere Gate is concerned, there are two bus stands. One is located on the
Ring Road at Kashmere Gate and the other is located at Mori Gate, which is
behind the Tis Hazari Courts. Insofar as the local buses i.e., intra-state buses,
are concerned, they are plying from the Mori Gate terminal, which is also
part of the Kashmere Gate terminal. However, there are no buses plying at
the Kashmere Gate terminal located on Ring Road. The shops are located at
the Ring Road side, hence there are no passengers.
8. Mr. Upadhay, ld. counsel appearing in W.P.(C) 3742/2020, submits
that insofar as the Petitioner is concerned, he has a license of six months and
since not a single bus is plying at the ISBT terminal, the Respondents should
not insist on payment of license fee or be permitted to forfeit the security.
9. Mr. Pracha, ld. counsel appearing in W.P.(C) 4302/2020 reiterates the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:21.07.2020 12:57
the submissions made in W.P.(C) 3742/2020.
10. Ms. Seema Bengani, ld. counsel appearing in W.P.(C) 3733/2020,
W.P.(C) 3779/2020 and W.P.(C) 3781/2020 submits that her clients' shops
are located at ISBT, Kashmere Gate, Anand Vihar and Sarai Kale Khan.
According to her, no buses are plying from these terminals.
11. Mr. Ajay Jain, ld. counsel appearing in W.P.(C) 3803/2020 submits
that w.e.f. 24th March, 2020, a lockdown has been put into effect and the
plying of buses has stopped. Even the electricity to the shops has been
disconnected.
12. In response to Ms. Bengani, ld. counsel, Mr. Narayan, ld. counsel
submits that in each of the counter affidavits filed, DTIDC has disclosed the
number of buses which are plying. He also submits that insofar as the Anand
Vihar and Sarai Kale Khan terminals are concerned, they are integrated
terminals and the fact that even intra-state buses are plying in these
terminals is sufficient for the allottees to continue their businesses. Thus,
they cannot claim any waiver.
13. Heard ld. Counsels for the parties. The following directions are
issued:
(i) Insofar as ISBT, Kashmere Gate is concerned, Mr. Narayan, ld.
counsel shall place on record a proper map which can be colour coded
so that this Court can peruse the same and adjudicate the issues raised
in the present petitions.
(ii) Insofar as W.P.(C) 3643/2020 is concerned, let the affidavit
along with the minutes of the Board Meeting be placed on record.
(iii) In W.P.(C) 4302/2020, issue notice. Mr. Gautam Narayan, ld.
Counsel accepts notice. Let the counter affidavit be filed within two
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:21.07.2020 12:57
weeks, along with an affidavit and a copy of the NIT and the license
agreement pertaining to these Petitioners. Rejoinder be filed before
the next date.
(iv) In all other writ petitions, let rejoinders be filed in two weeks.
14. In the meantime, DTIDC shall be bound by the statements made by
Mr. Narayan, ld. counsel in the previous orders and no coercive steps shall
be taken by the Respondents against the Petitioners.
15. List for hearing on 24th August, 2020 at the end of the board.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
JULY 20, 2020
dj/T
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:21.07.2020 12:57
