- Court
- High Court of Delhi
- Decided
- 27 October 2016
- Bench
- Indermeet Kaur
- Case no.
- W.P.(C) 10284/2016
Follow Delhi High CourtFollow Indermeet Kaur
Judgment
O R D E R %
27.10.2016
Petitioner is aggrieved by the in action on the part of the statutory body. His submission is that the Revenue Assistant has passed an order dated 18.8.2016 against which an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner had been filed on 05.9.2016. The first date fixed before the Deputy Commissioner was 19.10.2016 on which date, the Deputy Commissioner was busy in some administrative work and he had posted the matter for 22.11.2016. Meanwhile the petitioner received a notice from the Tehsildar for the execution of the order passed by the Revenue Assistant dated 18.8.2016. His submission is that his application seeking preponment of hearing before the Deputy Commissioner has not been considered. Additional submission being that in the absence of his appeal being taken up for hearing, the order of the Revenue Assistant which is under challenge cannot be implemented.
On advance notice learned counsel for respondent nos.1 to 3 has put in appearance. He submits that the Deputy Commissioner will endeavour to dispose of the appeal on 22.11.2016.
Till then no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner.
Petition dispose of.
Order dasti.
INDERMEET KAUR, J OCTOBER 27, 2016 ndn
Case details
Parties and counsel
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10284/2016 & C.M. No.40515/2016 VIJAY DEV DABAS ..... Petitioner Through Mr.V.P.Rana, Advocate. versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through Mr.P.Ray Chaudhuri, ASC with Mr. Aamir Aziz, Adv. for R-1, R-2 and R-3. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.