BINNY LIMITED Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE NORTH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the above writ petition seeking to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the first respondent in his proceedings No.N.K.No.DCD/No.2/50/954/2002 dated 14.2.2002 and to quash the same.

(2.) The petitioner is having its administrative office at Armenian Street. Originally in front of his office, there was no parking area. Later on, in view of the representation made by the second respondent, auto rickshaw stand was formed in front of the administrative office. Aggrieved by the order of the first respondent permitting the second respondent association to establish an auto rickshaw stand in front of his administrative office, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that all along there was no parking lot in front of their office. Suddenly, the second respondent gave a petition and the impugned order has been passed within a few days. Due to passing of this impugned order auto rickshaws are parked in front of his office and it affects free flow of traffic as well as ingress and egress to the office of the petitioner. Therefore, this writ petition has been filed to cancel the impugned order.