M/S N. C. JAIN AND SONS vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
$~40 & 41
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LPA 1095/2024, CM APPL. Nos. 64641-43/2024
M/S N.C. JAIN & SONS ….. Appellant
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta and Mr. Lalit
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Himanshu Pathak, (SPC), Mr.
Vedansh Anand, (GP) and Mr. Amit
Singh, Advocate.
41
+ LPA 1096/2024, CM APPL. Nos. 64686-88/2024
M/S A.S. MANOJ AND CO. & ORS ….. Appellants
Through: Mr. Jitender Mehta and Mr. Lalit
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Manish Kumar, SPC and Mr.
Gokul Sharma, GP.
% Date of Decision: 5th November, 2024
CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, CJ (ORAL)
1. Present appeals have been preferred under Clause X of the Letters Patent Act, 1866 assailing the impugned order dated 7th October, 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court, whereby the underlying writ petitions being W.P.(C) 12342/2024 and W.P.(C) 12467/2024 filed by
LPA 1095/2024 & Connected matter Page 1 of 3
the appellants were dismissed and the appellants were directed to vacate the subject stalls within a period of three (3) months.
2.
Learned counsel for the appellants states that though the learned Single Judge has granted an extension of three (3) months from the date of expiry of non dies period, yet in view of the order passed by the Supreme Court in SLP(C) No.23319/2024 dated 18th October 2024, an extension was granted to the petitioners therein till 15th February, 2025 to vacate their respective stalls. On this basis, learned counsel for the appellants requests that a further benefit of extension for a period of four (4) months, in addition to the extension of three (3) months as granted vide the impugned order, be directed in favor of the appellants herein, on the ground of parity.
3.
We note that the present appeals are similar to the appeal decided by this Court on 9th August, 2024 being LPA No. 770/2024 M/s Veer & Company Graduate Partnership Concern & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors
which was dismissed. It has been brought to this Courts notice that the said order dated 9th August, 2024 was challenged by way of a Special Leave Petition (for short SLP) being SLP(C) No. 19229/2024 M/s S Veer & Company Graduate Partnership Concern & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors.. The said SLP was disposed of allowing extension of four (4) months on account of dies non period effective from the date of order subject to filing of an undertaking within a period of four (4) weeks.
4.
The order dated 27th August, 2024 passed in SLP(C) No. 19229/2024
M/s S Veer & Company Graduate Partnership Concern & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. is reproduced hereunder:
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.
2. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court. We however extend the time granted by the
LPA 1095/2024 & Connected matter Page 2 of 3
learned Single Judge of the High Court in its order dated 29.05.2024 by four months from today. All the allottees shall vacate and handover the vacant possession of the stalls in question before the expiry of four months subject to filing of the usual undertaking before the Registry of this Court within four weeks from today.
3.
Accordingly, the Special Leave Petition is disposed of.
4.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
5.
In view of the aforesaid direction of the Supreme Court, this Court has been consistently passing similar orders granting extension of four (4) months with effect from 27th August 2024, in similar appeals.
6.
The operative portion of the impugned order is extracted hereunder:
12. The petitions are, therefore, disposed of with direction that, subject to payment of the license fee, the petitioners will be permitted to continue to operate their stalls for a period of three months from the date of expiry of the license, as extended by the respondents for the dies non period.
13. In the cases where the stalls have already been closed due to lapse of the dies non period, but the period of three months thereafter has not yet lapsed, the petitioners would be permitted to operate the stalls for the balance of the three-month period
7.
Considering the view taken by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order, whereby the appellants have already been granted three (3) months extension, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the directions passed in the impugned order dated 7th October, 2024.
8.
Since the three (3) months extension would enure to the benefit of the appellants till January, 2025, we find no justification in extending the time further. Accordingly, the appeals, along with the pending applications, are dismissed.
MANMOHAN, CJ
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J NOVEMBER 5, 2024/rl
LPA 1095/2024 & Connected matter Page 3 of 3