RANBIR SINGH Vs. D D A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR. Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since M/s gobind Narayan and Arun Sharma, advocates have already appeared on behalf of the petitioner and filed their vakalatnama also, he may be permitted to retire from the case. The petitioner who is present in person with Mr. Gobind Narayan submits that he does not wish to pursue the petition and has to that effect filed CM 17791/2007 for permission to withdraw the petition. A reading of the application for withdrawal shows that the petitioner now has no grievance against anybody and is satisfied with the inspection carried out by a team of experts of Govt. of National capital Territory of Delhi, Delhi Development Authority and Archaeological survey of India. Mr. Gobind Narayan and the petitioner further submit that the petitioner was only a name lender to the public interest petition which he was inspired to file by one Sh. Sukhinder Singh, S/o Sh. Subhash Singh of Village Mohamadpur. Mr. Gobind Narayan argued that the petitioner is an illiterate person and is wholly unaware of the implications of filing of the petition which may be allowed to be withdrawn without imposing any costs. Mr. Yadav, on the other hand, submitted that the petitioner is not an illiterate person as is sought to be made out and that he has been visiting his chambers to give him instructions in the matter. He urged that aspersion now being cast upon the entire process was wholly unjustified and malafide. He submitted that even he had prepared an application seeking withdrawal of the writ petition which he could not file as the affidavit accompanying the said application was not sworn by the petitioner.

(2.) THE writ petition had prayed for intervention of this Court in public interest to stop unauthorized construction and encroachment upon public land in and around protected monuments in Village Mohamadpur and to direct the respondents to take effective steps for having the said encroachments removed. A direction to demolish the unauthorized construction was also prayed for.

(3.) THIS Court had on the basis of the averments made in the writ petition which was supported by an affidavit directed notice to the opposite party and passed an order on 30th November, 2007 directing a team of officers comprising Executive Engineer of MCD, South Zone, the nominee of archaeological Survey of India and the petitioner to visit the spot together with the police officers from R. K. Puram Police Station and to report whether any unauthorized construction was in progress on spot. An inspection does appear to have taken place as is apparent from a status report which has been filed today in the Court. The said report inter alia points out that the mcd has initiated action against irregular/unauthorized construction found in progress at site. An earlier status report dated 5th November, 2007 filed by SHO of the R. K. Puram Police Station carried copies of six different FIRs registered in the said police station in regard to the unauthorized construction and encroachments etc. Mr. Midha has today filed a fresh status report on behalf of the police authority pointing out that a team of officers had visited the area and inspected the spot and even taken photographs. He submitted that the police authorities have kept the owners of the property, only the MCD and the Archaeological Survey of India informed about the developments at the spot to enable them to take proper action.