{"id":75515,"date":"2002-03-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-03-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002"},"modified":"2017-03-19T15:03:11","modified_gmt":"2017-03-19T09:33:11","slug":"residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002","title":{"rendered":"Residents Welfare Association Of … vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Residents Welfare Association Of … vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002<\/div>\n
Author: A Sikri<\/div>\n
Bench: S Sinha, A Sikri<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
A.K. Sikri, J. <\/p>\n
1.  CWP  No.16\/2000  is  filed  by  the  residents
\n           welfare  association of B 5 & 6, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi
\n           and  another  resident of the same colony.   This  writ
\n           petition  is  in  the  nature of  the  Public  Interest
\n           Litigation.   The  grievance of the residents  of  this
\n           colony  is that although after construction of flats by
\n           the DDA allotments thereof are made to the residents in
\n           the  year 1992 but the possession was given without any
\n           electricity  and  water.  Later on the electricity  was
\n           provided  in  the  year 1993 but there was  no  regular
\n           water  supply  which continued to be  supplied  through
\n           private  tankers.  The water supply started in the year
\n           1994  but  all is not well on these fronts even  today.
\n           The  water  pressure is so law that even in the  Ground
\n           Floors  the  water does not come directly in taps,  and
\n           therefore,  the  water  is stored in  tanks  fitted  on
\n           Ground  Floor  and then boosted to the overhead  tanks.
\n           This  water  is not even fit for human consumption  and
\n           the  residents have to get the same filtered or boiled.
\n           It  is further alleged in the writ petition that  right
\n           from  the  year 1996, the petitioners have been  making
\n           representations  to  various  governmental  authorities
\n           including  the  authorities  at the highest  level  but
\n           without any results.\n<\/p>\n
 2.                    Apart  from the above, it is alleged, all  the
\n           roads around the colony in question were without street
\n           lights.   In  the  absence  of   which  it  is  unsafe,
\n           particularly  for  girls  and ladies to  go  out  after
\n           sun-set.   There were no traffic signals either on  the
\n           turnings    which   often     cause   accidents.    The
\n           representations  were made to the authorities  pointing
\n           out these difficulties also but no heed has been paid.~
\n                    The  colony  is  also   inhabited  by  various
\n           jhuggis.   Letters  have been written to the DDA  since
\n           February, 1998 for removal of JJ clusters.  However, no
\n           action was taken.\n<\/p>\n
 3.                    To  add  insult to the woes of the  residents,
\n           the  park in the colony had been encroached upon by DJB
\n           since  November, 1998 because of which more than 50 per
\n           cent  tankers were being parked in front of the  colony
\n           which  had  been causing traffic problems and  constant
\n           nuisance.   The representations of the residents  about
\n           the  parking  of these tankers and misuse of  the  park
\n           have also got unheeded.  As nothing was done to assuage
\n           the  problems  of the residents, present writ  petition
\n           was filed.\n<\/p>\n
 4.                    CWP No.6827\/2000 is filed by an individual who
\n           is  also  a resident of Vasant Kunj.  He has also  made
\n           grievances  of almost the same nature.  He also  points
\n           out  in  this writ petition that nearest approach  road
\n           from  outer ring road to Vasant Kunj is a road  leading
\n           from Katwaria Sarai cutting across vast jungles on both
\n           sides  named as Aruna Asaf Ali Marg and at the edge  of
\n           this Marg there is a JJ cluster where children play all
\n           day  till  late evening along the road and can be  seen
\n           defecating  apart from making the road accident  prone.
\n           Two  kilometres  ahead  of road  towards  Vasant  Kunj,
\n           strong  foul  smell of dead animals spreads  making  it
\n           difficult  for the commuters to travel without  closing
\n           nose.   The  road  has never been carpeted  with  paver
\n           finish  eversince  its existence.  It is full of jumps,
\n           jerks and bumps.  During monsoon potholes and cesspools
\n           are  created.   Therefore, the petitioner in this  writ
\n           petition  also  prays  for   removal  of  JJ  clusters,
\n           providing  proper street lights and carpeting the  road
\n           as well as removal of dirt and filth from the jungle so
\n           that foul smell does not spread.\n<\/p>\n
 5.                    Both  these  writ  petitions   were  taken  up
\n           together and orders are passed from time to time in CWP
\n           No.16\/2000 treating that to be the leading case.\n<\/p>\n
 6.                    Cognizance  of the matter was taken by issuing
\n           notices to the concerned respondents, namely, MCD, DDA,
\n           DJB,  the Commissioner of Police, DVB, Govt.  of NCT of
\n           Delhi  as well as Central Social Welfare Board.  It may
\n           be  mentioned  here that the land which  is  encroached
\n           upon  by  the  JJ  clusters has been  allotted  to  the
\n           Central  Social Welfare Board(for short `Board’).  This
\n           allotment  was  made way back in the year 1990 but  the
\n           possession  has not been given to the Board as the  JJ
\n           clusters have not been removed.  Therefore, in a sense,
\n           this Board, although arrayed as one of the respondents,
\n           is  also praying for removal of JJ clusters so that  it
\n           is  able to get the possession of the land allotted  to
\n           it.\n<\/p>\n
 7.                    On  16th  October,  2000,  after  hearing  the
\n           matter  at  length, following order was passed in  this
\n           writ petition:\n<\/p>\n
                      “After  hearing  learned counsel for  the
\n                      parties  in  part we are of  the  opinion
\n                      that  D.D.A.   and   the  M.C.D.   should
\n                      maintain  a  chart  with  regard  to  the
\n                      encroachments  which have taken place  in
\n                      the   Vasant   Kunj   area.    Both   the
\n                      organisations  should set the targets for
\n                      removal  of encroachments and after every
\n                      fifteen   days  review   the   situation.
\n                      Copies  of  the  chart and  the  progress
\n                      reports  should be filed in court by head
\n                      of both the organisations.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       On  the  next date we shall consider  the
\n                      question of appointment of a committee to
\n                      oversee  the programme and progress  made
\n                      in  this  direction.  The S.H.O.,  Vasant
\n                      Kunj,  states that he is doing everything
\n                      possible  to regulate the traffic in  the
\n                      area.   He, however, states that a notice
\n                      be   issued   to    the   D.C.P.(Traffic)
\n                      South-West  District.  Accordingly, court
\n                      notice  be issued to the D.C.P.(Traffic),
\n                      South-West  District,  for  his  personal
\n                      appearance on the next date.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       Mr.V.Shekhar,  learned  counsel  for  the
\n                      petitioners,   points   out    that   the
\n                      condition  of roads is pitiable.  Learned
\n                      counsel   for  the   M.C.D.   shall  seek
\n                      instructions  as to whether the roads are
\n                      under  the M.C.D.  or the P.W.D.  In case
\n                      the  roads  are under the M.C.D.   ,  the
\n                      requisite  repairs  should be  undertaken
\n                      immediately.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       Mr.Joseph, learned senior counsel for the
\n                      Central Social Welfare Board, states that
\n                      requisite  payment for allotment of  land
\n                      in  favor of the Central Social  Welfare
\n                      Board has already been deposited with the
\n                      D.D.A.   Learned counsel has invited  our
\n                      attention  to the counter-affidavit filed
\n                      on  behalf  of his client.  According  to
\n                      the affidavit, the Lt.Governor has issued
\n                      orders  for removal of encroachments over
\n                      plot  of land which has been allotted  to
\n                      the  Central  Social  Welfare  Board  for
\n                      construction  of staff quarters.  He also
\n                      points   out  that   the  Central  Social
\n                      Welfare  Board  has informed  the  D.D.A.
\n                      that  the  Board shall bear the  expenses
\n                      for  removal  of encroachments.   Learned
\n                      counsel  for the D.D.A.  states that  she
\n                      will  seek instructions from her  clients
\n                      with regard to the question of removal of
\n                      encroachments from the aforesaid area.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       Learned counsel for the D.V.B.  says that
\n                      he will be filing an affidavit specifying
\n                      the   work  done  by   the  D.V.B.    for
\n                      providing street lights in the area.  Let
\n                      the affidavit be filed within two weeks.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       Let   the matter be listed on November 9,
\n                      2000.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       Copy  of  this  order be given  dusty  to
\n                      learned counsel for the parties.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
 8.                    Since  the DDA and the MCD did not comply with
\n           the  aforesaid  directions dated 16th October, 2000  by
\n           filing  requisite  charts and the progress reports,  on
\n           9th  November,  2000 an order was passed  for  personal
\n           presence  of  the  Vice Chairman, DDA as  well  as  the
\n           Commissioner,  MCD  for 13th November, 2000.   On  13th
\n           November, 2000, these officers appeared in person.  The
\n           Commissioner,  MCD  gave an assurance that order  dated
\n           16th  October, 2000 shall be complied with and  targets
\n           in accordance therewith shall be fixed and implemented.
\n           The  Vice  Chairman, DDA also made a statement  to  the
\n           effect  that he would be filing an affidavit specifying
\n           as  to how the problem of JJ clusters shall be  tackled
\n           by  the  DDA.  He also said that the DVB  can  go-ahead
\n           with  the  work of the laying of cables in Vasant  Kunj
\n           area  so as to electrify the roads.  On this  statement
\n           the  Executive Engineer, DVB assured the court that the
\n           remaining work of laying the cables and electrification
\n           of   the  roads  in  Vasant   Kunj  shall  be   started
\n           immediately  and  the work shall be completed within  a
\n           period  of  three  weeks.   The  matter  was  taken  up
\n           thereafter  from  time to time but no progress made  by
\n           the  respective authorities.  The progress made by  the
\n           authorities,  however,  was not to the satisfaction  of
\n           the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
    9.                 On  20th April, 2001 after hearing the  matter
\n           in detail the following directions were again issued by
\n           the court:\n<\/p>\n
 “It  is stated by the learned counsel for
\n                      the  petitioner  that there is an   acute
\n                      water  scarcity  in Vasant Kunj area  and
\n                      the  residents are receiving water supply
\n                      in the flats on the ground floor only for
\n                      forty  minutes  each  day.   It  is  also
\n                      stated  that  flats located on first  and
\n                      second  floors  do not receive any  water
\n                      supply  directly  due  to lack  of  water
\n                      pressure.   Learned counsel appearing for
\n                      the  Delhi  Jal Board says  that  various
\n                      measures  to augment water supply are  in
\n                      its   contemplation.    Learned   counsel
\n                      states  that  she  will   be  filing   an
\n                      affidavit  to  furnish  details  of  such
\n                      measures.   The  Delhi Jal  Board  should
\n                      apprise  us  of the short term  and  long
\n                      term   measures  undertaken  by  it   for
\n                      removing the water scarcity from the area
\n                      in question.\n<\/p>\n
                       It  is also stated by the learned counsel
\n                      for  the petitioners that the DVB has not
\n                      complied   with  the   order  dated  16th
\n                      October,   2000  whereby   the  DVB   was
\n                      directed  to  provide  sufficient  street
\n                      lights  in  the  area.   Learned  counsel
\n                      appearing  for  the DVB, however,  states
\n                      that   sufficient  lighting    has   been
\n                      provided  in  areas  along the  roads  of
\n                      pockets  2,  3, 4, 5 and 6 in  Sector  B,
\n                      Vasant Kunj, New Delhi.\n<\/p>\n
                       In  so  far as the plying and parking  of
\n                      heavy   and  medium   goods  vehicles  at
\n                      Mehrauli-Mahipal Road is concerned, it is
\n                      stated   by  learned   counsel  for   the
\n                      petitioners   that  there   has  been  no
\n                      improvement  in  the situation.   On  the
\n                      other hand, learned counsel appearing for
\n                      the   traffic  department   says  that  a
\n                      notification  was  issued by  the  Deputy
\n                      Commissioner  of  Police, Traffic,  Delhi
\n                      whereby plying and parking of heavy goods
\n                      vehicles  and  medium goods  vehicles  at
\n                      Mehrauli-Mahipalpur  road from 6.00  p.m.
\n                      to  9.00 p.m.  has been prohibited.   The
\n                      learned  counsel  for the  respondent  in
\n                      response  to the assertion of the learned
\n                      counsel  for the petitioners states  that
\n                      heavy and medium goods vehicles are being
\n                      plied  and parked at  Mehrauli-Mahipalpur
\n                      road,  Delhi at all times of the day  and
\n                      this can be checked up.\n<\/p>\n
                       Having   regard  to   the  submission  of
\n                      learned  counsel for the parties, we  are
\n                      of  the view that Committee comprising of
\n                      Ms.Gita Mittal, Mr.V.K.Sharma, Mr.Sanjeev
\n                      Sachdeva  and  Mr.Rajiv   Awasthi  should
\n                      inspect  the  area  to  find  out  as  to
\n                      whether  the areas under the jurisdiction
\n                      of  the DVB have been properly lighted or
\n                      not.  The Committee shall also verify the
\n                      claim  of the traffic department that the
\n                      plying  and  parking of heavy and  medium
\n                      goods  vehicles  in   Mehrauli-Mahipalpur
\n                      area   have  been   prohibited  and   the
\n                      prohibition  is being strictly  observed.
\n                      Let  the inspection be carried out within
\n                      the  next two   days.    The  report   be
\n                      submitted before the next date.\n<\/p>\n
                       It  is  stated in the affidavit filed  by
\n                      the MCD that on 29th December, 2000, 18th
\n                      January, 2001 and 24th January, 2001, the
\n                      necessary  police force was not  provided
\n                      for removal of encroachments.  If this be
\n                      so,  it is a clear violation of our order
\n                      by   the  police   department.   Let   an
\n                      affidavit  be  filed  by  the   concerned
\n                      S.H.O.    stating  as  to   why  on   the
\n                      aforesaid  dates,  police force  was  not
\n                      provided  to  the MCD for removal of  the
\n                      encroachments.   The  affidavit be  filed
\n                      before the next date.\n<\/p>\n
                       List  the  matter on 25th May,  2001.   A
\n                      copy  of this order be given dusty to the
\n                      learned counsel for the NCT of Delhi.”\n<\/p>\n
     10.                The  Committee  of the lawyers constituted  by
\n           the  aforesaid order inspected the area in question and
\n           submitted its report on 21st May, 2001.  The report, in
\n           nutshell,  showed  that areas in question had not  been
\n           fully  lighted up by the DVB.  Other deficiencies  were
\n           also  pointed  out.  Keeping in view  the  observations
\n           made  by  the Committee in its report, the court  again
\n           gave  certain directions by passing the following order
\n           on 3rd August, 2001:\n<\/p>\n
                       “We  have  perused  the   report  of  the
\n                      committee dated 21st May, 2001.  From the
\n                      report  it  appears  that  the  areas  in
\n                      question  have not been fully lighted  up
\n                      by  the DVB.  Learned counsel for the DVB
\n                      says  that one more opportunity be  given
\n                      to  the  DDA  to fully  light  the  area.
\n                      Having  regard  to the statement  of  the
\n                      learned  counsel  for  the   DVB  we  are
\n                      willing  to give one more opportunity  to
\n                      DVB.  Let the needful be done within four
\n                      weeks.   Insofar  as the  regulations  of
\n                      traffic  on the Mehrauli Mahipalpur  road
\n                      is    concerned     the   A.C.P.(Traffic)
\n                      South-West  District,  who is present  in
\n                      Court  says  that further steps shall  be
\n                      taken  to  fully  comply with  the  order
\n                      dated 20th April, 2001.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       It  is stated by the learned counsel  for
\n                      the  petitioner that the main reason  why
\n                      the  streets are not free from garbage is
\n                      that the sanitation staff of the MCD does
\n                      not visit the areas regularly and remain
\n                      absent  and  their   place  someone  else
\n                      works.  It appears to us that the problem
\n                      may  be controlled to a very large extent
\n                      if  the  MCD  makes the  payment  to  the
\n                      sanitation  staff  by  means  of  account
\n                      payee  cheques or by crediting the salary
\n                      to  their  individual bank accounts.   In
\n                      the  circumstances,  we would direct  the
\n                      MCD  to adopt this method.  The MCD  will
\n                      see to it that by adopting the new method
\n                      employees  get their salaries at an early
\n                      date.   Mr.Mukherjee, learned counsel for
\n                      the  MCD says that he would sit with  the
\n                      counsel  for the petitioner and evolve  a
\n                      methodology for keeping the colony clean.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       The  committee  should again inspect  the
\n                      areas  to  find as to whether our  orders
\n                      are  being  complied with by the DVB  and
\n                      the  traffic  department.  The  committee
\n                      should  inspect  the entire  Vasant  Kunj
\n                      area  as set out in the map  accompanying
\n                      the  report.   Let  the report  be  filed
\n                      within four weeks.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       It   is  also  the   grievance   of   the
\n                      petitioner  that the water supply has not
\n                      improved.   Ms.Geeta Mittal says that she
\n                      will  seek instructions from her  client
\n                      and  interact  with the petitioner.   DJB
\n                      shall file an affidavit stating the steps
\n                      taken by it to improve the water supply.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       To come up on 28th September, 2001.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       Copy of the order be given to the counsel
\n                      for  the  MCD under the signature of  the
\n                      Court Master today.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
         11.            The  Committee of the lawyers again  inspected
\n           the  site  and submitted its report.   The  respondents
\n           were  directed to file their responses to this  report.
\n           The  DVB,  MCD and the Traffic police have filed  their
\n           responses.  The matter was thereafter heard at length.\n<\/p>\n
                     Now,  we  would  examine each problem  in  the
\n           light  of report of the Committee and responses thereto
\n           filed by the authorities.\n<\/p>\n
                      1.   Plying  of heavy and medium vehicles  on
\n                         the  road.\n<\/p>\n
              12.       The  Committee has observed that there is free
\n           flow  of  heavy  and  medium   goods  vehicles  on  the
\n           Mehrauli-Mahipalpur  road although some improvement  in
\n           the  situation  is visible as the number of  heavy  and
\n           medium  goods vehicles now plying is considerably less.
\n           It  is further reported that with the commissioning  of
\n           flyover  there is a smooth flow of traffic on the  said
\n           road although there is a persistent blockage of traffic
\n           at  the  crossing of Mahipalpur and also  the  Andheria
\n           Modh  during  peak  times.  These  vehicles  are  being
\n           parked on the said road even during peak traffic times.\n<\/p>\n
                 13.    As  per  the stand taken by the Delhi  traffic
\n           Police  it has issued Notification dated 3rd  November,
\n           2000  by  virtue of which plying and parking  of  heavy
\n           goods   vehicles   and  medium    goods   vehicles   on
\n           Mahrauli-Mahipalapur  road  from 6 AM to 9 PM has  been
\n           prohibited.  Copy of this Notification has been annexed
\n           along with the affidavit dated 14th December, 2000.  In
\n           view  of  this, Mr.V.K.Shali, learned counsel for  this
\n           respondent  submitted that statutory steps which  could
\n           be  taken  had  already been taken.  If  the  aforesaid
\n           vehicles   are   still  plied  on  this   road   during
\n           prohibitory  hours,  the  only option for  the  traffic
\n           police  was  to prosecute the offenders which is  being
\n           done.   To demonstrate, a statement of challans for the
\n           period  from  1st January, 2000 to 28th February,  2002
\n           has been filed on 9th March, 2002 giving details of the
\n           type  of vehicles, namely, heavy goods vehicles,  light
\n           goods vehicles and buses who were challaned during this
\n           period  and the offences for which they were  challaned
\n           and also giving total number of challans.\n<\/p>\n
                   14.  In  these circumstances, no further directions
\n           can  be  passed on this account as the necessary  steps
\n           have  been taken by the Delhi Traffic Police.  However,
\n           having regard to the submission made by learned counsel
\n           for  the  petitioners  to the effect that  the  traffic
\n           police  was  not taking adequate steps for  prosecuting
\n           the  violators,  we would expect that the strict  steps
\n           for  challaning and prosecuting the offenders be  taken
\n           inasmuch  as  if the traffic police acts sincerely  and
\n           seriously,  sending  message to the violators  that  it
\n           means business and no offender would go scot free, this
\n           problem  can be almost wiped out.  We say so in view of
\n           the  fact  that as per the Committee, the  movement  of
\n           heavy  and  medium goods vehicles on this  road  during
\n           peak  hours  is still there.  Such a regular  flow  for
\n           these  vehicles normally is not expected if there is  a
\n           prohibitory  order, and therefore, this lends  credence
\n           to  the  submission  of  the learned  counsel  for  the
\n           petitioners   that  the  traffic   police  may  not  be
\n           discharging  its  duties in right earnest.   We  would,
\n           therefore,  direct  the DCP(Traffic) to  take  personal
\n           interest  in the matter and ensure strict compliance of
\n           Notification dated 3rd November, 2000.\n<\/p>\n
                     2. Lighting up of Vasant Kunj area:\n<\/p>\n
                     The Committee has painted dismal picture about
\n           this problem in its report as it states as under:\n<\/p>\n
                        “The  Committee  inspected   the   entire
\n                      Vasant  Kunj  area as set out in the  Map
\n                      accompanying  the report dated  23.5.2001
\n                      and the position in the rest of the areas
\n                      of Vasant Kunj was found to be similar to
\n                      the  areas  inspected  earlier.   It  was
\n                      found that most of the areas were without
\n                      electricity  and barely 10% of the  poles
\n                      were in working  order.   At  most of the
\n                      places  the  poles were not  even  having
\n                      bulbs  or  complete   fittings  and  were
\n                      largely  fixed without serving any useful
\n                      purpose.   It  is submitted that some  of
\n                      the  areas  were pitch dark  and  passage
\n                      there from  would be a grave security risk
\n                      for   the  residents.     The   committee
\n                      observed      that          the      main
\n                      Mahipalpur-Mehrauli  was reasonably  well
\n                      lit  however the areas within the various
\n                      pockets  were  by and large  without  any
\n                      lighting.   It  was  observed  that  even
\n                      though  on  the Main Nelson Mandela  Road
\n                      there  were  electricity poles fixed  but
\n                      most of the times they were not lit up at
\n                      all.   On the Main Aruna Asaf Ali Road it
\n                      was  observed that there was no provision
\n                      for   electrification  and   for   street
\n                      lights.”   <\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                 15.    The  DVB  has filed its affidavit  dated  13th
\n           March,  2002  responding  to  the  aforesaid  report  a
\n           perusal  whereof would show that as per the DVB  things
\n           are  not  as  bad as projected by the  Committee.   The
\n.PL64
\n           relevant paras of this affidavit read as under:\n<\/p>\n
                       “4.    That   A  total   number   of   14
\n                      inspections  have been carried out by the
\n                      DVB.   On  average, street  lighting  was
\n                      found  about  90%  functional.   A  chart
\n                      giving   details   of     the   date   of
\n                      inspections,  the areas inspected, number
\n                      of   poles   checked    and   number   of
\n                      poles\/street  lights found functional  is
\n                      annexed herewith as Annexure R-5.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       5.   That endeavor was made to accompany
\n                      the  members  of  the  Residents  Welfare
\n                      Association  also.   The members  of  the
\n                      Residents  Welfare Association joined the
\n                      inspecting team and have also noticed the
\n                      street  lights  functional.  Some of  the
\n                      Residents  Welfare Association have given
\n                      the appreciation letters to DVB which are
\n                      annexed  herewith as Annexure R-6.  It is
\n                      pertinent   to  mention   here  that  the
\n                      Residents   Welfare    Association   have
\n                      appreciated the endeavor made by DVB and
\n                      are  satisfied  with the street  lighting
\n                      provided in their pockets.”  <\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                  16.   The  letters of the Vasant Kunj(C-8) Residents
\n           Welfare  Association and B-7 & 9(Vasant Kunj) Residents
\n           Welfare  Association  have been filed and as per  these
\n           letters  the DVB is maintaining street lights properly.
\n           This  affidavit  of the DVB, however, does not  address
\n           the  problem of electrification on the main Aruna  Asaf
\n           Ali  road.   We,  accordingly, direct the DVB  to  take
\n           necessary  steps  for  electrification   of  this  area
\n           consistent  with  the  earlier orders  passed  in  this
\n           respect from time to time.  In case no progress is made
\n           on  this  front, the petitioners shall be  entitled  to
\n           approach this court again.\n<\/p>\n
                     3.  Unauthorised occupants\/encroachments:
\n                      It  is  an admitted fact that along  side  the          main  Mehrauli-Mahipalpur road various temporary and in
\n           some  case permanent structures have come up which  are
\n           illegal and unauthorised.  As per the Committee many JJ
\n           clusters were coming up in the open areas in and around
\n           Vasant Kunj.  Same was the position along side the main
\n           Mehrauli-Mahipalapur   road   where   some   of   these
\n           structures  were being used for the purpose of shops as
\n           well.   The Committee has also observed that at various
\n           places  open  areas have been converted and were  being
\n           used  for the purposes of parking of vehicles and  also
\n           for  dumping of broken and unused vehicles.  Some areas
\n           meant  for  agricultural  land were  being  misused  by
\n           various  persons in violation of the Master Plan.   The
\n           Committee has annexed various photographs in respect of
\n           its report to the aforesaid effect.\n<\/p>\n
                     It  cannot be disputed that these unauthorised
\n           JJ  clusters  have  to  be   removed.   The  matter  of
\n           rehabilitation  of these JJ clusters is pending  before
\n           this  court  in number of writ petitions  wherein  this
\n           problem  is  examined on a wider scale.  The JJ  (Slum)
\n           department  has in fact prepared some schemes for  this
\n           purpose.   It  would be, therefore, appropriate if  the
\n           petitioners file a separate writ petition in respect of
\n           this problem in Vasant Kunj area so that it is taken up
\n           along  with other matters which are listed on 1st  May,
\n           2002.  We are saying so because of the fact that in the
\n           instant  case,  the Slum Department has not  been  made
\n           party  and  therefore,  there is no response  from  the
\n           concerned  authority  and  in the  absence  thereof  no
\n           positive  directions can be issued.  Moreover, it would
\n           be  appropriate  to deal with this problem  along  with
\n           other  cases related to the same problem.  This liberty
\n           is accordingly granted to the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
                     So  far  as  parking of vehicles on  the  open
\n           areas  and  dumping  of broken and unused  vehicles  in
\n           these  open  areas is concerned, we direct the  MCD  as
\n           well  as  the Traffic Police to take appropriate  steps
\n           for  removal of the dumped vehicles and also to  ensure
\n           that  the  vehicles are not parked there.   Needful  be
\n           done by these authorities immediately.  If no steps are
\n           taken  by the concerned respondents within a reasonable
\n           time,  the petitioners shall be at liberty to  approach
\n           this court again.\n<\/p>\n
                    4.     Removal    of     demolished    illegal\n                           constructions:  \n<\/pre>\n
                      The  Committee  has reported that  at  various
\n           places  there  had  been   demolition  of  unauthorised
\n           constructions.   However, the demolished structures had
\n           not  been removed and had been lying in very dangerous
\n           conditions.   Some of these demolished structures  were
\n           still  being  used and were inhabited despite being  in
\n           dangerous  condition.   Photographs are also  filed  in
\n           support  of  this  contention.  We have  perused  these
\n           photographs  and are convinced that the report to  this
\n           effect  is  correct.  We direct the MCD  to  completely
\n           demolish  the  structures where partial demolition  has
\n           taken  place  and  some  of the  structures  though  in
\n           dilapidated  condition after such demolition, are still
\n           being  used.  A compliance report be filed in this case
\n           within a period of four weeks from today.\n<\/p>\n
                     5. Garbage disposal:\n<\/p>\n
                      The  Committee  has confirmed the  allegations
\n           made  by  the  petitioners  to the  effect  that  large
\n           expanse  of  open  areas of land at various  places  is
\n           being  used  for dumping of garbage wherein  there  was
\n           also  water-logging of waste water which was becoming a
\n           breeding  ground  for mosquitoes and pigs.  This  is  a
\n           very serious problem.  The Municipal authorities should
\n           be  sensitive  to  such  a problem  and  show  adequate
\n           concern by taking necessary steps inasmuch as there can
\n           be  a  threat  of break of epidemic  disease,  if  such
\n           garbage  is  allowed to remain.  It is well known  that
\n           epidemic  plague which spread in the Surat in 1994  was
\n           primarily  because of accumulation of filth and garbage
\n           which  acted  as breeding ground for rodents.   Article
\n           243W  readwith  twelfth  schedule of  the  Constitution
\n           fastens  the responsibility of solid waster  management
\n           on  the municipalities.  It is a mandatory function  of
\n           any   municipality.   There   are  specific  provisions
\n           (Sections   350  to 364)  in  the   Delhi   Municipal
\n           Corporation  Act,  1957  relating  to  conservancy  and
\n           sanitation.  As per Section 350 it is the obligation of
\n           the MCD to secure efficient scavenging and cleansing of
\n           all  streets  and premises and for that purpose,  inter
\n           alia, to provide for the removal of the contents of all
\n           receptacles  and depots and of the accumulations at all
\n           places  provided  for temporary deposit of rubbish  and
\n           other polluted and obnoxious matter.\n<\/p>\n
 17.                    We  may  also put on record that in  a  Public
\n           Interest  Litigation  filed in the Apex  Court  seeking
\n           direction to the local bodies as well as the Government
\n           of  India and the State Government to improve the solid
\n           waste  management practices, a Committee was  appointed
\n           by  the court known as Barman Committee which submitted
\n           its  report  in  March,  1999.   As  a  follow  up  the
\n           Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules,
\n           2000  were issued by the Central Government in exercise
\n           of  its  power under the Environment (Protection)  Act,
\n           1986.    These   Rules   also   cast  duties   on   the
\n           municipalities  as  well  as citizens for  solid  waste
\n           management.\n<\/p>\n
      18.               The   Municipal   Corporation  of   Delhi   is
\n           accordingly  directed  to  take   effective  steps   on
\n           emergent  basis immediately for removal of the  garbage
\n           as  well as water-logging of waste water and clear  the
\n           area  from  such menace.  The Municipal Corporation  of
\n           Delhi  is  also directed to ensure that these areas  do
\n           not become the places for dumping of garbage in future.
\n           If  effective steps are not taken the petitioner  shall
\n           be  entitled  to approach this court for  bringing  the
\n           same to the notice of the court.\n<\/p>\n
          19.           The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of
\n           with  the aforesaid directions.  It is made clear  that
\n           the  non-implementation  of  these  directions  by  the
\n           various authorities would be viewed seriously which may
\n           also call for action against the erring officials.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Residents Welfare Association Of … vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002 Author: A Sikri Bench: S Sinha, A Sikri JUDGMENT A.K. Sikri, J. 1. CWP No.16\/2000 is filed by the residents welfare association of B 5 & 6, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi and another resident of the same colony. This […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-75515","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nResidents Welfare Association Of ... vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Residents Welfare Association Of ... vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2002-03-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-19T09:33:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"22 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Residents Welfare Association Of … vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-03-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-19T09:33:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002\"},\"wordCount\":4423,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002\",\"name\":\"Residents Welfare Association Of ... vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-03-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-19T09:33:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Residents Welfare Association Of … vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Residents Welfare Association Of ... vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Residents Welfare Association Of ... vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-03-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-19T09:33:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"22 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Residents Welfare Association Of … vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002","datePublished":"2002-03-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-19T09:33:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002"},"wordCount":4423,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002","name":"Residents Welfare Association Of ... vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-03-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-19T09:33:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/residents-welfare-association-of-vs-d-d-a-and-ors-on-22-march-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Residents Welfare Association Of … vs D.D.A. And Ors. on 22 March, 2002"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75515","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=75515"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75515\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75515"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=75515"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75515"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}