AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral)
At the outset, learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 challenges the maintainability of the present Petition. He submits that this Court cannot entertain the present Petition in view of the fact that proceedings are pending adjudication before the Estate Officer, NDMC [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Authority’]. He seeks to rely upon Section 15 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 [hereinafter referred to as ‘PP Act’] in this regard.
This contention is not refuted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner. However, a request is made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner for expeditious disposal of the proceedings pending before the Authority.
Learned Counsel for Respondent No.1, on instructions, submits that the Respondent No.1 shall not take unnecessary adjournments before the Authority during the proceedings and will take steps to ensure a speedy disposal.
Both parties are directed not to take any unnecessary adjournments in the proceedings before the Authority.
The Estate Officer, NDMC is requested to dispose of the proceedings as soon as is feasible.
The present Petition is accordingly disposed of in the aforegoing terms.
It is clarified that this Court has not examined the matter on merits. All rights and contentions of the parties are left open in this regard to be agitated before the Authority.
The parties shall act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.