However, the court held that based on the material on record, it was unable to accept the petitioner’s stand that the the JJ Basti was in existence prior to January 1, 2006 and their prayer to conduct a second survey was also not accepted because DUSIB has already carried out the exercise in 2012-2013.
While reaching these conclusions, Justice Prasad underscored that a writ court could not go into excruciating details of facts, which required to be proved by the union by leading evidence in their individual capacity.
“Thus a writ only lies where there is a right.”
Source: Barandbench
