Delhi High Court - Orders
Shakina vs Delhi Development Authority on 8 June, 2020
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
SINDHU KRISHNAKUMAR
08.06.2020 13:08
$~1
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3390/2020 & CM APPLs. 12032/2020, 12033/2020
SHAKINA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pawan Bindra & Mr. Sanjeet
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Arun Birbal, Advocate.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 08.06.2020
1. This hearing has been held by video-conferencing.
2. Issue notice in this matter. Mr. Arun Birbal accepts notice for DDA. Vide order dated 23rd April, 2019, a ld. Division Bench of this Court had directed as under:
"....
In view of the selling-up of the Special Task Force under directions of the Supreme Court it is not appropriate for our court to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction in matters relating to unauthorised construction; and we would therefore dispose of the present petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to raise the grievance before the Special Task Force so constituted, in accordance with the scheme and procedure formulated under the aforesaid two Office Memorandums.
Interim order passed by us on 4.12.2018 in C.M. No.50649/2018 shall continue till the Special Task Force takes-up the matter and forms a considered view as to the status of the W.P.(C) 3390/2020 Page 1 of 3 subject property.
This petition is disposed of in the above terms."
3. As per the above order, passed by the Ld. Division Bench, the Special Task Force was to take a view on the Petitioner's property as per the scheme and procedure formulated under the office memorandums and until the STF takes a considered view, the interim order granted on 4th December 2018 was to continue.
4. The Special Task Force met on 20th January, 2020. On the said date, no view was taken as per the minutes which were placed on record.
5. Ld. Counsels for the Petitioner submit that the urgency in the matter is because a WhatsApp message has been circulated dated 1st June, 2020 that demolition of the Petitioner's property would be carried out from today. Ld. counsel further submits that the demolition is being carried out as the Court is hearing the matter.
6. Mr. Arun Birbal, ld. counsel seeks time to find out as to whether any view was taken by the Special Task Force or not.
7. Since the ld. Division Bench's order is clear that a view has to be taken by the Special Task Force, Mr. Birbal may obtain instructions as to whether the STF has taken a view in the matter.
8. In the meantime, Mr. Birbal submits that he will instruct the DDA's demolition team accordingly.
9. List on 9th June, 2020.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
JUNE 08, 2020 Rahul The above order was passed in the morning when the case was heard W.P.(C) 3390/2020 Page 2 of 3 at 10:30 a.m. At 12:30 p.m., parties again requested for mentioning the matter before the Bench and accordingly, the Court Master arranged the video conferencing hearing. It is submitted by ld. counsels for the Petitioner that the demolition is continuing. Accordingly, it is directed that the demolition shall remain stayed till Mr. Birbal, ld. counsel obtains instructions tomorrow.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
JUNE 08, 2020 Rahul W.P.(C) 3390/2020 Page 3 of 3