46-year delay in moving court prompts Delhi High Court to reject man's plea

A plea by a man seeking relief after his business establishment was demolished in 1975 was dismissed by the Delhi High Court on the ground that he had knocked the doors of the Court 46 years after the incident [Mohd Suleman v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation]..Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva noted that the man’s shop was demolished in 1975 and that his petition was liable to be dismissed on the ground of a gross delay in approaching the court of law."This is a case where the petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of gross delay and latches in approaching the court of law. Shop of the petitioner was demolished as far back as 1975 and petitioner has waited for over 46 years in approaching this court," the order stated..The petitioner sought a direction to the municipal body to decide on his representation made in 2019 whereby he sought allotment of an alternative shop. He claimed that his shop, built in 1971, was situated in Meena Bazar, opposite Jama Masjid. It was razed in a demolition drive undertaken during the Emergency in 1975.He claimed that on October 11, 1977, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) had framed a policy for allotment of an alternative shop to Motia Khan Steel Merchants, who were evicted from the Motia Khan area, as well as those whose shops were demolished during the same demolition drive..The petitioner stated that despite repeated representations over the years, he did not receive any response from the DDA. It came to the Court’s notice that on June 2, 2010, the petitioner had received a response from the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC), informing him that his representation was considered by the competent authority and it was decided that there was no scope for any new entrant in the existing plan..The petitioner was stated to have again made subsequent representations.“It is an admitted position that after the shop was demolished in 1975 and the formulation of policy in 1977 and even after petitioner was communicated by letter dated 02.06.2010 that his representation has been considered by the competent authority and his request could not be acceded to, petitioner has not approached any Court of law seeking to enforce rights, if any,” the order highlighted..Calling it a “seemingly innocuous prayer” of seeking a direction to the respondents to dispose of his representation, the Court said it appeared to be an attempt on part of the petitioner to create a fresh a cause of action so that he could overcome delay in seeking relief.“There is no ground to direct respondents to even decide his representation. I find no merit in the petition. The petition is, accordingly, dismissed,” it held..Advocate Prashant Kumar appeared for the petitioner and advocate Anuj Chaturved represented the NDMC. Advocate Ashim Vachher appeared for DDA and advocates Nitin Jain and Parvinder Chauhan argued for Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (DUSIB)..[Read Order]