n 51,54 & 5g r $-X NY THE HIGH COURT OF' DELHI AT NEW DELIII 51+ W.P.(C) 8r9r/20r0 MEHRAJ AHMAD ..... peritioner Through: Mr. Sanobar Ali Qureshi, Adv. ^. Versus THE COMMISSIONE& MCD & ORS. ..... Respondents rhrough: h.#EL5'A:1;"#. Addr AND 54+ W.P.(C) 8194/2010 QAMRUDDIN ..... petirioner Through: Mr. Sanobar Ali Qureshi, Adv. Versus THE COMMISSIONE& McD & oRS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, Addl. Standing Counsel for MCD. 58+ W p tcl 8rs2t20r0 AND -''-' NooR MOHAMMAD ..... peritioner Through: Mr. Sanobar Ali Qureshi, Adv. Versus THE COMMISSIONE& McD & oRS. ..... Respondents Through: None. U- ** 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 t I CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW ORDER % 08.12.2010 1. The facts of Writ Petitions Nos.8191/2010 & 8194/2010 are the same as of W.P.(C) No. 8152/2010listed before this Court on 6th December. 20L0 and in which notice has been issued for 14th January, Z0lI. a' 2. The petitioner in each of the three petitions is the occupant of different shops in the market known as sunder Mandi and otherwise commonly known as Murga Mandi. These writ petitions have been fi|ed for direction to the respondent MCD to grant to each of the petitioners, Trade License for dealing in meat/meat products. The petitioners had acquired their respective shops on re-purchase from the original allottee but claim to have paid 1 ,* of approximately {80,000/- each for regularization of the allotrnent in their favour. The case of the petitioners is that notwithstanding the same, they are not being granted the license, perhaps for the reason of the shops being within the prohibited distance from a temple. 3- It is however the case of the petitioners that the prescribed user of the shop of each of thepetitioners is for sale of chicken/fish/meat only. 4. The counsel for the petitioners today states that instead of issuing notice in these writ petiqions, these writ petitions as well as w.p.(c) 2t- \-Jl No.8152/2010 listed next on 14ft January, 20fi be disposed of with a direction to the respondent MCD to decide the applications of the petitioners for Meat Trade License in the shops subject matters of these writ petitions within four weeks. 5. In the aforesaid circumstances, the file of w.P.(C) No.8152/2010 has t' also been called for. 6. The counsel for the respondent MCD states that time of six weeks instead of four weeks be granted for processing and deciding the applications of the petitioners for license. 7. In view of the aforesaid, ttre writ petitions are disposed of with the direction to the respondent MCD to decide the applications of each of the petitioners for grant of Meat Trade License with respect to the shops subject matters of each of the writ petitions, within six weeks of today. The petitioners to appear before the Veterinary Office1 Shahdara North Zone, MCD on93'o December ,2010 at 1500 hours and on such other dates which may be given. The appiications be disposed of with a reasoned order. 8. Needless to state if the petitioners remain aggrieved, they shall have remedies in law. No order as to costs. -- 3t- , \o CM No.21111/2010 in W.P.(C) No.8191/2010 & CM No.21119/2010 in W.P.(C) No.8194/2010 (both for exemption) Allowed, subject to just exceptions. Copy of this order be given Dasti. t' DECEMBER 08, bs.. RAJTV SAHAI ENDLAW, J a -2 .J 4t-