NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION  Vs VIKAS GOEL AND OTHERS

LPA 293/20 20 Page 1 of 2
$~14.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decided on: 18th January, 2021
+ LPA 293/2020 & C.M.No.25388/2020 (directions & stay)
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ….. Appellant
Through: Mr.Akhil Mittal, with Mr.Divya
Prakash Pandey , Standing Counsel s.
Versus
VIKAS GOEL AND OTHERS ….. Respondent s
Through: Mr.Somya Singh, Advocate with
Ms.Sumera Anjum & Mr.Mohd.Juned, Advocates
CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH
JUDGMENT
:
1. Being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by the judgment and order
passed by the learned Single Judge dated 5th October, 2020 in W.P.(C)
No.7478/2020, the original respondent in the said writ petition has preferred
the present appeal . D.N.PATEL, Ch ief Justice (Oral)
Proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video
conferencing.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and looked in to the
facts and circumstances of the case . The appellant vide order dated 29th
September, 2020 had suspe nded the petitione rs from the meetings of the
Corporation for a period of 15 days, exercising power under Section 79(3) of
the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and this order was assailed in the
writ petition.
3. Writ petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge vide order
2021:DHC:209-DBLPA 293/20 20 Page 2 of 2
dated 5th October, 2020 . The learned Single Judge recorded the statement of
the counsel for the appellant, on instructions, that the Meeting of the House
was not scheduled to be held on 6th October, 2020 and was deferred till 15th
October, 2020. Learned Single Judge observed that from the course of action
proposed by the appellant herein, the right of the original petitioners to
espouse their cause before the House would remain unaffected and at best
the notice of suspension would be treated as fi rst suspension under Section
79(2) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and since period of 15
days would have expired by the end of the period for which the meeting was
deferred , the petition would become infru ctuous.
4. From the conspectus of facts and circumstances, it is evident that the
effect of the impugned order , which was in force , for 15 days, with effect
from 29th September, 2020 has come to an end by efflux of time. Hence, the
issue with regard to the power of the Appellant under Section 7 9(3) of the
Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 is only academic .
5. This appeal is accordingly disposed of as inf ructuous keeping the
question of the power of the appellant under Section 79(3) of the Delhi
Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 open. As and when such question arises in
future in any other litigation, the same shall be decided in accordance with
law, Rules, Regulations and the facts of the said case.

CHIEF JUSTICE

JYOTI SINGH, J
JANUARY 18, 2021
‘anb’
2021:DHC:209-DB