(1.) .In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution, reliefs claimed include quashing of a decision taken by the New Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) dated 22nd June 2004 whereby the petitioner ?Ts request for permission to display two Unipoles advts. were declined. A consequential order has been sought against NDMC, for restraining it from interfering with the display of such Unipoles advts.
(2.) The petitioner avers that it entered into an agreement with the owner of property No.2, commonly known as Masjid Kasturba Gandhi Marg, for display of two Unipole advertisements. measuring 20 ?T x 20 ?T. These advertosements (hereafter called hoardings) were to be placed at a round about on Kasturba Gandhi Marg. The petitioner applied to NDMC for permission to put them up on 5th February 2004. It is claimed that the provisions of Bye laws framed in the year 1992, by the NDMC, required considerion and disposal of the application within 60 days, failing which the consequence prescribed was a deemed permission. The period of 60 days expired on 5th April 2004. The petitioner claims to have put up the Unipole on 10th April 2004. It is averred that on 28th April 2004, the NDMC, started action by way of removing / pulling down Unipoles. This led to the filing of an injunction suit by the petitioner.
(3.) On 5th May 2004, this Court appointed a Local Commissioner, in the injunction suit. The Commissioner visited the site and submitted his report on 6th May 2004. The Court directed the parties to maintain the status quo. Eventually, the suit was disposed off on 27th May 2004 with a direction to NDMC to consider the application of the petitioner, afresh. It was also directed that the plaint in the suit was to be treated as the petitioner ?Ts application; an opportunity of hearing was also required to be granted to the petitioner.