Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Delhi · body

2025 DAILYLAW 1652 (DEL)

SATYA PRAKASH & ANR. v. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS.

W.P.(C)/10373/2025 · 2026-03-09

Jasmeet Singh

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10373/2025 SATYA PRAKASH & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Satya Prakash in person versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Adv. for R- 1/ MCD Ms. Shahana Farah (Addl. Standing Counsel) with Mr. Abhigyan, Ms. Reya Paul, Ms. Amruta Padhi, Ms. Nidhi Singh, Advs. for R-2/DDA Mr. Anubhav Gupta, Panel Counsel (Civil) for R-3/ GNCTD CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R % 09.03.2026 1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayer(s):- “It is therefore, prayed that this Hon‘ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ of mandamus to the Respondent No.1 to 3 to dismantle the unauthorized construction of the godown and further to release the public land measuring about 1200 sq. yards forming part of Khasra No.30/9 in the revenue estate of Village Nangli Poona, Delhi- 110036 in the interest of justice. …” 2. For the reasons stated in the petition, issue notice. 3. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/03/2026 at 13:44:11 No. 1, Ms. Farah, learned ASC accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 2 and Mr. Anubhav, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 3. 4. A perusal of the petition shows that the petitioners are residents of Village Budhpur, Delhi- 110036, and are seeking to agitate issues with regard to unauthorised construction of godown forming part of Village Nangli Poona, Delhi- 110036, which is at a distance of about 5 kms from where the petitioners reside. 5. I am of the view that no rights of the petitioners are affected and the present petition is not a Public Interest Litigation. The petition on the face of it seems to be for motivated and extraneous purposes. For the said reasons, I am not inclined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. The present petition is dismissed in the aforesaid terms. JASMEET SINGH, J MARCH 9, 2026/sp This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 13/03/2026 at 13:44:11