Gyan Devi v. The Union of India

ORDER o/o

09.10.2009 W.P.rc^ No. 12235/2009 & CM No. 12522/2009 I do not tinink it will be appropriateto entertain this writ petitionin a representativecapacitywithout details like name and addresses. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitionersubmits that the present writ petitionmay be treatedas filed bythe petitionerin her personalcapacityand for personal relief. Learnedcounsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that demolitionand dispossessionaction has alreadybeen taken and possession is with the respondents. The writ petition itself disclosesthat action was taken sometime in August, 2009 and thereafteron October,2009. In view of the above facts, I do not think any order can be passed to Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. protectthe presentwritpetitioner. In casethe petitioneris in occupationof 2^ the property,itwill be open to her to approachthe respondentsand ask for 24 hours for vacatingthe same. In case any such representationwith an undertakingis made, the same will be sympatheticallyconsideredby the respondents. Thisorderhas been passedin this particularcaseand will not be treated as precedence in any other cases. OCTOBER 09, 2009 VKR/P^ C

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

c 34. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 12235/2009 GYAN DEVI Petitioner / Tlirough l^r. P. George Giri, Advocate. versus THE UNION OF INDIA Respondent TlirougiiMr. Jatan Singli,CGSC for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA