W.P.(C)/6441/2018 of RAM PARSAD BISMIL Vs THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS

Court: Delhi High Court
Decision date: 2018-06-01
Case number: 6441/2018

Parties

RAM PARSAD BISMIL (PETITIONER)
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS (RESPONDENT)

Cites (1)

BAIL APPLN./1697/2020 of SHAHJADA IRFAN Vs THE STATE NCT OF DELHI (2020)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(C) 6441/2018

RAM PARSAD BISMIL

..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Rajeev Ranjan Pandey, Adv.

versus

THE STATE NCT OF DELHI AND ORS

..... Respondents Through: Ms. Shobna Takair, Adv./GNCTD. Counsel for respondents 1 to 3. (appearance not given).

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

O R R% 01.06.2018

C.M. Nos.24752-53/2018 (exemptions)

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

The applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 6441/2018

Vide the present petition, the petitioner has sought direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to cancel the order dated 26[th] February, 2016 passed by the SDM, whereby Sh. Rev Singh has been declared as Bhumidar of the land in question.

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not, per se, aggrieved by the order dated 26[th] February, 2016 passed by the Revenue Assistant, declaring Sh. Rev Singh as Bhumidar, but since the aforesaid person is using the land in question for commercial purposes

instead of the agricultural purposes as mandated under the provisions of Delhi Reforms Act, the order dated 26[th] February, 2016 ought to be recalled. He submits that, despite the petitioner having made various complaints to the higher Revenue Authorities as also to the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, no action has been taken on any of his complaints.

Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3, who appears on advance notice submits that the petitioner has not made any complaint to respondent Nos.1 to 3 and has merely endorsed copy of his complaint to the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi to the respondent No.2. However, she submits that instead of going into any technicalities, the respondents will examine the petitioner’s aforesaid complaint and pass reasoned and speaking order thereon within 12 weeks from today.

Needless to say, in case the petitioner is still aggrieved, it will be open

to the petitioner to take legal recourse as permissible under the law.

JUNE 01, 2018 neelam

REKHA PALLI, J.