Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Smt Pushpawanti & Ors vs Delhi Development Authority on 15 December, 2021

Author: Najmi Waziri

Bench: Najmi Waziri

                              $~18 (1)
                              *     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                              +     CONT.CAS(C) 245/2021
                                    SMT PUSHPAWANTI & ORS.                                 ..... Petitioners
                                                          Through:     Mr. J.K. Bhola and Mr. Shashank
                                                                       Kumar, Advs.

                                                          versus

                                    DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY          ..... Respondent
                                                 Through: Mr. Arun Birbal and Mr. Sanjay
                                                          Singh, Advs.

                                    CORAM:
                                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
                                                 ORDER

% 15.12.2021 The hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode (physical and hearing).

1. The petitioners were to be allotted a plot of land in category 'A' by Delhi Development Authority ('DDA') in terms of this court's order dated 19.02.2020 in W.P.(C) 925/2015. The order has not been complied with. Petitioner no.1 is still hopeful and expectant of her rights fructifying by way of handing over of a plot of land to which she has been entitled since the year this country attained independence.

2. The Commissioner, Old Scheme Branch, DDA, is the Officer who was supposed to have complied with the order. However, he has not been impleaded as respondent although he would be a necessary party.

3. In the circumstances, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Commissioner, OSB, DDA, is impleaded as the respondent and the Vice Chairman, DDA, is deleted from the array of parties.

4. Let the Amended Memo of Parties be filed in 2 weeks.

5. Albeit a status report has been filed stating that a notice has been issued in the LPA preferred by DDA, there is no stay of the order, the implementation of which is sought.

6. In view of the above, the court finds that, prima facie, the respondent has committed contempt.

7. Issue notice to the respondent-Commissioner, to show cause, why contempt proceedings be not initiated against him for having committed contempt under section 2 (b) read with section 10 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

8. The learned counsel named above accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

9. Reply/Compliance affidavit be filed in 4 weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed before the next date.

10.List on 01.02.2022.

NAJMI WAZIRI, J DECEMBER 15, 2021 AB Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:20.12.2021 17:27:59