AMULYA C v. JNU

ORDER

26.11.2012 With the consent of learned counsel for the petitioners, respondent no. 1 is deleted from the array of parties. The main grievance of the petitioners, in the captionedcontempt CONT.CAS(C)790/2012& Connectedmatters • Page5 of 7 petitions, is that, despitethe orders of this court dated 29.02.2012passed in WP(C) No. 150/2012,there has been no assistanceextendedby the officers of the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) in ensuring that the boring and the connection of the water line, in respect of the apartments in question, is made to the main distributipn line. Learnedcounselfor thepetitionersays that they are willingto bringto site their own registeredplumberor any other qualifiedplumber so that the needful can be done under the supervision of the concerned officers of the DJB. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 (who are now shown as 1, 2 & 3, on account of deletion of respondent no. 1 from the array of parties) submits that the Mr L.L. Meena, ExecutiveEngineer(South), will remain present at site alongwith his officers, so that the needful is done. In view of the statementof the learned counsel for the respondents, this exercisewill commenceat 11.00 a.m., on 01.12.2012. The petitioners will ensure that their registeredplumber or any other qualifiedplumber is available at site to carry out the said exercise. The concerned SHO of the area shall also remain present at site so that no untoward incident occurs at the site when the aforesaidexercise is being carried out. A copy of the order will be served on the concernedSHO by the officers of the DJB and/or the counsel for the petitioners. With the aforesaiddirections, the contemptpetitionsare disposedof. List for compliance on 19.12.2012. On the next date of hearing, Mr L.L. Meeha, ExecutiveEngineer (JON r.CAS(C)790/2012& Connectedmatters Page 6 of7 (South)shall remainpresentin court. Dasti underthe signaturesofthe courtmaster. NOVEMBER 26,2012 RAJIVSHAKDH^,J CONT.CAS(C)790/2012&Connectedmatters Page 7 of7