Delhi High Court - Orders
Dhirendra Nath Puri vs Defence Colony Welfare Association ... on 7 October, 2021
Author: Rekha Palli
Bench: Rekha Palli
Via Video-Conferencing
$~38
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 11537/2021
DHIRENDRA NATH PURI ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Aditya Dewan, Adv.
versus
DEFENCE COLONY WELFARE ASSOCIATION REGISTERED
SOCIETY THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT & ORS. ..... Respondent
Through Mr.Arjun Dewan with Mr.Akash
Arora, Advs for R-1 & 2.
Mr.Gautam Narayan, ASC for R-3 & 5.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
ORDER
% 07.10.2021 CM APPL. 35590/2021
1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The attested affidavit be filed within one week.
3. The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 11537/2021 & CM APPL. 35589/2021(interim direction)
4. The present petition has been preferred by a resident of Defence Colony, inter alia alleging that the Defence Colony Welfare Association (DCWA)/ respondent no.1 is not only acting contrary to its own rules and regulations but is also trying to hold elections both of respondent no. 1 and of respondent no. 2 in an unfair and partial Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN Signing Date:08.10.2021 17:35:05 manner by appointing biased polling officers.
5. At the outset, it has been put to learned counsel for the petitioner as to how a writ petition would be maintainable against respondent nos.1 & 2, which are private entities. In response, he submits that the petitioner has already approached the respondent no.3/ concerned District Magistrate, by way of a representation dated 20.09.2021, requesting therein that (i) an impartial inquiry be held qua the manner of functioning of respondent no.1, and (ii) the forthcoming elections for the DCWA Club (to be held on 10.10.2021) as also to the DCWA (to be held on 17.10.2021) be conducted under the supervision of respondent no.3. He therefore contends that as respondent no. 3 has not taken any action on the said representation and therefore failed in discharging its statutory duties, the petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court.
6. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 1 & 2, while opposing the writ petition on the ground of maintainability, submits on instructions that he has no objection to the respondent no. 3 deciding the petitioner‟s representation.
7. However, keeping in view, the serious allegations levelled by the petitioner in regard to the manner in which the elections are being conducted, it has been put to the learned counsel for the parties as to whether they would be agreeable to the respondent no. 3 deputing an officer to remain present during the elections to avoid any allegation of irregularity at a subsequent stage. Learned counsel for the petitioner as also for respondent nos. 1 & 2 are agreeable to the said suggestion.
Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN Signing Date:08.10.2021 17:35:058. In the light of the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent no. 3 to expeditiously consider the petitioner‟s aforesaid representation in accordance with law. The respondent no. 3 is further directed to depute an officer to remain present during the proposed elections of respondent nos. 1 & 2 on 17.10.2021 and 10.10.2021 respectively, to act as an observer.
9. It is made clear that this Court has neither expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner‟s claim nor on the objection of respondent nos. 1 & 2 regarding the maintainability of the present petition.
10.The petition, along with the pending application is, accordingly, disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
REKHA PALLI, J OCTOBER 7, 2021 sr Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN Signing Date:08.10.2021 17:35:05