S. M. MATLOOB Vs. ASMA PARVEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present letters patent appeal has been filed assailing the order dtd. 3/2/2025 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the Review Petition No.205/2024 filed by the appellant in the underlying writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No.11706/2023 titled Asma Parveen vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors., whereby the appellant sought review of the order dtd. 4/4/2024 vide which the application of the appellant (CM APPL.14463/2024) for intervening in the underlying writ petition as informant was dismissed.

(2.) It is the case of the appellant that he is a former employee of Ministry of External Affairs and a whistleblower by nature. It is stated that the respondent no.1 had filed the underlying writ petition seeking action against unauthorized construction and illegal encroachment by respondent nos.2 to 5 therein on immovable property bearing no.S-10, D-20, part of Khasra No.427/260/88, near Mumtaz Masjid, Batla House, Okhla, New Delhi-110025. The said petition was supported by three annexures including copies of the Agreement to Sell, the complaint against the respondents therein, and photographs. The appellant claims that after he came to know about the serious perjury committed in the form of fake documents of the property by showing Rs.50,00,000.00 as payment, he filed an application (CM APPL.57729/2023) as an intervener, seeking impleadment on the ground of fraud committed by respondent no.1. However, vide order dtd. 7/11/2023, the said application was dismissed by the learned Single Judge noting that the appellant has no connection with the subject property and is not directly affected by the subject matter of the said writ petition, which stood disposed of.

(3.) It is further stated that the appellant filed a second application (CM APPL.14463/2024) on the premise that the respondent no.1 had filed forged, fabricated and fake documents before the learned Single Judge with the ulterior motive to obtain a favourable order for wrongful gains, and to blackmail the builder. The said application stood dismissed vide order dtd. 4/4/2024 however with the liberty to the appellant to pursue appropriate remedies in accordance with law, including approaching the police for investigation against the respondent no.1 in case she is resorting to any illegal action of blackmailing any builder or any other party.