BEENA BABURAM Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner claiming to be a resident of A/314, Dr. Ambedkar Colony, Andheria Modh, New Delhi has filed this petition contending that the respondents acting in contravention of the judgment dated 13 th February, 2003 in W.P.(C) No.3993/2000 earlier preferred by the petitioner along with others, have on 3rd March, 2010 demolished the boundary wall of the petitioner's premises and claiming the relief of restraining the respondents from fencing or carrying on any construction activity or from raising a boundary wall taking away a part of the open land claimed to be part of the property of the petitioner. THE counsel for the respondents however, on 15th March, 2010 when this petition came up before this Court, informed this Court that the respondent no.1 Government of NCT of Delhi had already taken possession of the open land abutting the property of the petitioner and had also constructed a boundary wall to secure the said land. Accordingly, an interim order was made restraining the respondents from raising any further construction over the said land and restraining the petitioner from demolishing the boundary wall already constructed by the respondents.

(2.) THIS petition as aforesaid was filed by the petitioner for restraining the respondents from taking over open area abutting her property. However the said open area/land already stands taken by the respondents, before the filing of the writ petition. Thus the relief claimed in the writ petition has, strictly speaking, become infructuous. The petitioner has not bothered to amend the writ petition to claim the relief of status quo ante.

(3.) THE earlier writ petition was disposed of as aforesaid vide judgment dated 13th February, 2003 and in accordance with the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Common Cause v. Union of India [W.P.(C) No.4771/1993]. Finding that no definite stand was being taken by the Government for regularization of unauthorized colonies, directions in this regard were issued to the Government of India and, so as to prevent the authorities from indulging in a policy of pick & choose, they were directed to maintain status quo till such decision is taken.