Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Sanrakshak -The Protector vs Union Of India . on 2 May, 2016
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice, R. Banumathi, Uday Umesh Lalit
1
ITEM NO.30 COURT NO.1 SECTION PIL(W)
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 112/2007
SANRAKSHAK -THE PROTECTOR Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for c/delay in filing counter affidavit and
impleadment and office report)
WITH
W.P.(C) No. 559/2008
(With Office Report)
W.P.(C) No. 261/2012
(With Office Report)
Date : 02/05/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE R. BANUMATHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT
For Petitioner(s)
Mr. K. S. Rana, Adv.
Mr. Abhay Kumar, Adv.
Mr. P. S. Sudheer, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Mr. Aftab Ali Khan, Adv.
Mr. Akshat Shrivastava, Adv.
Mr. Ansar Ahmad Chaudhary, Adv.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. B. S. Banthia, Adv.
Mr. D. S. Mahra, Adv.
Mr. Gopal Singh, dv.
Mr. Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, Adv.
Mr. Kamlendra Mishra, Adv.
Signature Not Verified Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, Adv.
Digitally signed by
ASHOK RAJ SINGH
Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, Adv.
Date: 2016.07.04
10:36:47 IST
Reason:
Mr. Rajesh Goyal, Adv.
Mr. R. Sathish, Adv.
Mr. V. G. Pragasam, Adv.
Mr. V. K. Verma, Adv.
Ms. Anitha Shenoy ,Adv.
2
M/s Arputham, Adv.
Aruna & Co., Adv.
Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, Adv.
Ms. A. Subhashini, Adv.
Ms. C. K. Sucharita, dv.
M/s Corporate Law Group, Adv.
Ms. G. Indira, Adv.
Ms. K. Enatoli Sema, Adv.
Mr. Irshad Ahmad, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
W.P. (C) No.112 of 2007
The writ petition is disposed off with the liberty prayed for in terms of the signed order.
W.P. (C) No.559 of 2008 & W.P. (C) No.261 of 2012 In view of the order passed in W.P. (Civil) No.112/2007, these writ petitions also stand disposed off in the similar terms.
(Ashok Raj Singh) (Veena Khera)
Court Master Court Master
(Signed Order is placed in the file) 3 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C) NO.112/2007 SANRAKSHAK -THE PROTECTOR PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION (C) NO.559/2008 & WRIT PETITION (C) NO.261/2012 O R D E R W.P.(Civil) No.112/2007 This writ petition filed in public interest prays for a mandamus directing respondents No.1 to 32 and 38 to 50 and in particular respondent No.1 and 2 to frame National Guidelines for issuing public advertisements in mass media by builders, developers and others to the extent that before publishing any such public advertisements in the media including print media or electronic media, the person, firm, company, any body incorporate or other association of individuals should be mandatorily required to provide every document or all concerned documents so that the claim made in the advertisements could be counter-checked and stopped at initial stage itself to prevent innocent persons being duped by false and 4 misleading advertisements. It has also prayed for mandamus directing the respondent No.1 to 3 to constitute a statutory body which would examine each and every aspect of the claim made in public advertisements with a further direction to respondent No.2 to make necessary amendment in Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as recommended by the Law Commission of India.
Mr. N.K. Kaul, learned Additional Solicitor General points out that this writ petition has become infructuous as the Parliament has enacted what is known as Real Estate Regulation and Development Act, 2016. The Act, according to learned ASG has received the assent of the President of India on 25.03.2016 and has been duly published in official gazette on 26.03.2016. It has since come into force with effect from 01.05.2016. He submits that in the light of the statutory measures provided by the legislation aforementioned, the apprehensions expressed by the petitioner are taken care of and substantially allayed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in light of the subsequent developments referred to above this writ petition can be disposed of reserving liberty to any one aggrieved of any misleading public advertisement to seek such redress as may be appropriate in accordance with law.
5
This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the liberty prayed for.
W.P.(C) No.559/2008 & W.P.(C) No. 261/2012 In view of the order passed in W.P. (Civil) No.112/2007, these writ petitions also stand disposed of in the similar terms.
.......................CJI.
(T.S.THAKUR) .........................J. (R. BANUMATHI) .........................J. (UDAY UMESH LALIT) NEW DELHI, MAY 2, 2016.