Delhi High Court
Nasimuddin vs South Delhi Municipal ... on 23 February, 2022
$~29
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 23rd February, 2022
+ W.P.(C) 13663/2021
NASIMUDDIN ..... Petitioner
versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
& ORS ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. M. Sufian Siddiqui with Mr. Rakesh Bhugra & Ms.
Alya Veronica Advocates
For the Respondents: Mr. Ajay Aroraa along with Mr. Kapil Dutta, Standing
Counsels for South DMC
Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, ASC, Civil GNCTD with Ms.
Manisha Chauhan Advocate for Respondent No. 2 and 3
SI Manish Tyagi PS- Jamia Nagar
Mr. A.K. Dey, Advocate for R-4
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:23.02.2022
Signing Date:23.02.2022 23:01:20 21:40
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
2. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to take action
against the illegal unlicensed meat shop.
3. It is the contention of the petitioner that respondent no. 4 is
illegally carrying out the sale of meat from the said shop and is
encroaching upon public area and has kept articles, chicken cages and
dustbin etc. on public land and further has parked his private vehicle
on the public street which is used for loading and unloading of meat
and causes obstructions to the passage. He further submits that the
shop was being run in a very unhygienic condition.
4. Status report has been filed by the Corporation which states that
a veterinary trade licence for running a meat shop for sale of buffalo
meat has been issued to Respondent No. 4. The status report further
states that the property was inspected from time to time, however, no
violation of the guidelines/term of licence or unhygienic conditions
were found at the time of inspection.
5. This is disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. Said
contention of the counsel for the petitioner is also borne out from the
photographs annexed with the petition. However, it may be possible
that at the time of inspection, respondent no. 4 may have taken
necessary precautions and no infraction was found.
6. Status report filed by respondent no. 2 has been shared over e-
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:23.02.2022
Signing Date:23.02.2022 23:01:20 21:40
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
mail of the Court Master. The same is taken on record.
7. Respondent no. 4 has also filed his affidavit confirming that he
has a licence for sale of buffalo meat only. The affidavit further states
that he is not selling chicken meat in his shop.
8. It is disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner that
respondent no. 4 is selling only buffalo meat and is not selling chicken
from the said shop. Photographs annexed with the petition show that
there are chicken cages kept outside the premises. However, they
seem empty in the photographs.
9. Be that as it may, since respondent no. 4 in his affidavit has
admitted that he only has a licence for selling buffalo meat and does
not sell chicken. The said respondent is bound down to his statement.
10. This petition is disposed of with a direction to the Corporation
to carry out the surprise inspections of the premises of Respondent
No. 4 from time to time to ensure compliance of the conditions of the
licence as also to ensure maintenance of hygiene by respondent no. 4
while running the said shop.
11. Further, respondent no. 4 is restrained from committing a
breach of the conditions of the licence and accordingly it is directed
that he shall abide by the terms of conditions of his licence and shall
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:23.02.2022
Signing Date:23.02.2022 23:01:20 21:40
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
sell buffalo meat only. He is also directed to maintain strict hygiene in
accordance with the conditions of the licence. He shall not encroach
upon the public street. He is granted two days time to remove any
article inter alia chicken cages kept on the public street.
12. Learned counsel appearing for respondent-Corporation and
Delhi Police submit that if any breach is noticed, appropriate action in
accordance with law shall be taken. They, further, assure that in case
petitioner faces any further difficulty he can contact the said
respondents and action in accordance with law shall be taken. The
statement is accepted.
13. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.
14. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and
be also forwarded to learned counsels through email by the Court
Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
FEBRUARY 23, 2022
'rs'
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:23.02.2022
Signing Date:23.02.2022 23:01:20 21:40
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
