Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (1.14 seconds)Dehri Rohtas Light Railway Company ... vs District Board Bhojpur And Ors on 12 March, 1992
18. Further the decision in the case of M/s Dehri
Rohtas Light Railway Company Ltd. Vs. District
Board, Bhojpur & Ors. (1992) 2 SCC 598 is relied upon,
wherein this Court has indicated the real test to
determine the delay is that the petitioner should come to
Court before a parallel right is created and that the lapse
of time is not attributable to any laches or negligence.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 5 in The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 [Entire Act]
The Limitation Act, 1963
Section 21 in Delhi University Act, 1922 [Entire Act]
Adil Singh vs Uoi . on 18 December, 2014
6. The learned Single Judge having noticed the entire
sequence refused to entertain the writ petition of the
University including on the ground of delay and laches. In
the judgment dated 27.04.2015 the Court however
observed that DDA is the master of the formulation and
implementation of the Master Plan and, necessary
approvals have been taken from various statutory
authorities for the housing project. It was also observed
that the change in the land use from “public” to
“residential” is permissible by adverting to the Delhi High
Court’s Division Bench Judgment in Adil Singh vs.
Union of India (2010) 171 DLT 748. According to the
Writ court, since it was a policy decision taken by the
Government body and since the appellantUniversity has
Page 4 of 34
failed to demonstrate any illegality, impropriety, mala fide
in the decision making by the authority, interference of the
Court with the policy decision, would not be justified.
1