Delhi High Court
Ready Mint Pvt. Ltd. vs Government Of National Capital ... on 17 March, 2021
$~35 & 36
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 17.03.2021
+ W.P.(C) 3666/2020 & CM. APPL. 13092/2020
COMMUNITY WELFARE BANQUET & ORS ..... Petitioner
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF
DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
+ W.P.(C) 3676/2020 & CM. APPLS.13163-65/2020
READY MINT PVT. LTD. ..... Petitioner
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF
DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sachin Chopra and Ms. Astha Gupta,
Advocates in W.P(C) 3666/2020.
Mr. Sunil Dalal, Advocate and Mr. Devashish
Bhadauria, Advocates in W.P(C) 3676/2020.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, ASC with Mr. Naman Jain,
Advocates.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICESANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. These petitions inter alia seek quashing of orders dated
12.6.2020 whereby banquet halls were requisitioned for con verting
them into makeshift COVID-19 designated hospitals/zones.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:17.03.2021 23:09:51
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after filing of the
petition, all the banquet halls have been re-requisitioned an d h anded
back on 21.8.2020.
3. Learned counsel submits that t hough t he ban quet h alls h ave
been handed back, the question as to the legality of the su bject order
or the right of the respondent to pass such an order still survives.
4. He further submits that in terms of Section 66 of t h e Disast er
Management Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the
concerned officer, who requisitioned the property was also required to
determine the compensation to be paid for such purpose.
5. Learned counsel submits that it was obligatory on the said
officer to pass the order of payment compensation in terms of Sect ion
66 without the requirement of an application.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that sin ce on e of
the factors for determination of compensation, under Section 66 of the
Act, is the rent payable in respect of the said prem ises, it wou ld be
necessary for the banquet owner to give requisite details.
7. In view of the above, the petitions are disposed of, perm itting
the banquet owners whose banquet halls h ad been requ isitioned t o
make an application under Section 66 of the Act to the concerned
officer providing the requisite details as stipulated in the said Sect ion
for the purposes of determination of compensation, if any.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:17.03.2021 23:09:51
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
8. On receipt of the application, the concerned officer shall
dispose of the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of six
weeks of the receipt of the application.
9. Since the banquet halls have already been de-requisitioned an d
possession handed back to the owners, t he qu estion with regard t o
validity of the order and the competence of the officer is left open.
10. The petitioners are accordingly disposed of. All rights and
contentions of the parties are reserved.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
MARCH 17, 2021
NA
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:17.03.2021 23:09:51
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
