SHAIK ABDUL HAMEED Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENNT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for quashing and setting aside the letter dated 19th November, 2012 by virtue of which respondent-DDA granted permission to respondent no. 2 to install a lift in Block No. C-4, Usha Niketan, Safderjung Development Area, New Delhi.

(2.) MS . Vasundhara Pathak Masoodi, learned counsel for petitioner contends that respondent-DDA's own procedure for issuance of NOC for installation of lifts in group housing flats built up by DDA has not been followed in the present case. She states that neither the location of the lift well nor the petitioner's own affidavit and undertaking had been enclosed along with application dated 11th September, 2012.

(3.) MS . Vasundhara also contends that construction of the lift constitutes a safety and security hazard to the petitioner. She states that load of foot- over bridge has been placed upon the petitioner's wall which can cause the petitioner's flat to collapse. In this connection, she relies upon a certificate issued by Bhudiraja & Associates, Architects. In fact, relying upon Bhudiraja's report she contends that petitioner's property has been punctured and damaged.