IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI w.P.(c) s6ru2010 CHANDRA BHAN ..... Petitioner Mr.Lalit Bhardwaj, Adv. Through VCTSUS MCD & ORS #6 + ..... Respondents Through Ms.Mansi Gupta, Adv. R-l Mr.Ajay Verma, Adv. R-3 Mr.Jitendra Kumar, Adv. R_5 i CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA ORDER o/o D.01.2011. on 18th August,2010, this court had passed the following order: - "Heard Mr. Lalit Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms.Shyel Trehan, learned counsel for the rvico and ' Ms.Sangeeeta chandra, rearned counsel for the DDA. The basic grievance in this public interest petition is that despite a judgment of this Court commanding ifre respondents to provide alternative sites for the milk dairy fanns and to remove the unauthorized milk dairies situate in K]rasra Nos. 769,770 and rTr,ytrlage Naharpur, sector-7, Rohini, Delhi - 110085, no steps have been taken. Learned ,orrrr"i for the MCD submitted that allotments have been done in favour of the dairy farms but all of them have not yet been shifted regard being had to the fact that on the newly allotted sites, there is paucity of water supply. WP(C) No.56I I/2010 page I of 3 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified ?J Regard being had to the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the MCD, it is thought appropriate to implead Delhi Jal Board as a respondent. Learned cbunset for the petitioner is permified to recti$r the cause title in Court ioday after mentioning "As per the order passed by the court,,. Let notice be issued to the newly added respondent, returnable on 1Oth November,2010. In the meantime, rearned counser for MCD as welr as DDA shall file their counter affidavits explaining their stand and stance. Call on 10,h November. ZOIO.. Thereafter, on 15th December, 20L0, the following order came to be passed. "This court on earlier occasion has taken note of the fact that shifting of dairy farms courd not be done due to paucity of water supply. Regard being had to the said facet, the Delhi Jal Board was made a respondent. on 10th November, 2010, learned counsel representing the Delhi Jal Board had prayed for time to file the counter affidavit. Despite the same undertaking, counter affidavit has not been filed. Today, none is present on beharf of the Delhi Jal Board. In view of the aforesaid, chief Executive officer of Delhi Jal Board shall remain personally present in court on the next date of hearing failing which, this court may be compelled to issue appropriate directions, as advised in law. WP(C) No.56I I/2010 page 2 of 3 J,* It . Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Chief Executive officer of Delhi Jai Board through a special Messenger so that the said authority shall be alprised of the order passed by this court and remain personally piesent. List the matter on 12th January, 2011.,, We have been apprised today by Mr.Jitendra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the Delhi Jal Board that the counter affidavit has been filed stating, inter aIia, that the Delhi Jal Board has completed the work for water supply to the area in question and the same shall be handed over to the MCD by 10th February , Z0lI. In view of the aforesaid, we are only inclined to direct that after the said exercise is completed by the Delhi Jal Board, as undertaken, the MCD shall proceed accordingly. The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. Needless to say, if the petitioner has any grievance at alaterstage, it is open to him to file a fresh public interest litigation. 4zr-rr' CHIEF JUSTICE L.-, .? a SANJIV ll. .-- KTIANINA, J JANUARY 12,2011 kapil WP(C) No.56I I/2010 pqge 3 of 3