Verify if deficiencies exist in Hyatt’s functioning: High Court
BY PTI29 Oct 2014 4:31 AM IST
PTI29 Oct 2014 4:31 AM IST
The Delhi High Court on Monday asked the authorities to verify whether there are any deficiencies in the functioning of luxury hotel Hyatt Regency as alleged by by the family of a youth who had suffered injuries after accidentally falling from its sixth floor to the fourth.
Justice Vibhu Bakhru directed the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC), fire department and the licensing authority to verify whether the deficiencies, as alleged in the petition filed on behalf of the youth as well as in the show cause notice issued to the hotel by Delhi police, exist.
The court asked one person from the petitioner’s side to visit Hyatt on a certain date and time, fixed in advance with the hotel, and inspect the sixth floor to see if there are any deficiencies which could affect the safety and security of the guests there.
Thereafter, they may give within two weeks a written representation to the authorities regarding the deficiencies, if any, and the same shall be verified by the authorities within four weeks, it said.
The authorities were also directed to verify whether the deficiencies as alleged by Delhi Police in its show cause notice sent to Hyatt on 12 September, 2014, do exist or have been addressed by the hotel, the court said.
It further said the outcome of the verification be communicated to the petitioner and disposed of the petition.
Meanwhile, Hyatt submitted before the court that there are no deficiencies in its functioning and it has not violated any law.
It also said that it is willing to make any further improvements as may be suggested by the authorities.
The plea had been filed by the sister of a young man, Gaurav Rishi who had suffered serious injuries on the night of 16 October, 2013, when he fell from the hotel’s sixth floor to the fourth floor and was in a coma for several months. While allowing the petitioner’s side to inspect Hyatt, the court made it clear that the same will be for just one hour and should not obstruct the business of the hotel in any manner.
During the proceedings, senior advocate A S Chandhiok, appearing for Rishi, questioned how the licensing authority renewed the hotel’s licence on 19 June when on 4 June Delhi Police in its status report filed before the court had pointed out several deficiencies in Hyatt’s functioning.
The licensing authority in its affidavit had said that Hyatt had on June 2, 2014 submitted the municipal body’s health trade licence (HTL) and the No-Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Fire department for renewal of its lodging licence, as required under the law for running a place of public entertainment.
It had also said that Hyatt’s HTL was valid up to 31 March, 2015, and its NOC from the Fire department till 12 March, 2017, and since it had complied with these two mandatory requirements, the hotel’s lodging licence was renewed on 19 June, 2014, for the period from April 2014 to March 2015.
Delhi Police had in its show cause notice of 12 September sought a reply from Hyatt within 15 days i.e by 27 September, on why its lodging licence will not be revoked for ‘violations’ reported
by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) South District.
Justice Vibhu Bakhru directed the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC), fire department and the licensing authority to verify whether the deficiencies, as alleged in the petition filed on behalf of the youth as well as in the show cause notice issued to the hotel by Delhi police, exist.
The court asked one person from the petitioner’s side to visit Hyatt on a certain date and time, fixed in advance with the hotel, and inspect the sixth floor to see if there are any deficiencies which could affect the safety and security of the guests there.
Thereafter, they may give within two weeks a written representation to the authorities regarding the deficiencies, if any, and the same shall be verified by the authorities within four weeks, it said.
The authorities were also directed to verify whether the deficiencies as alleged by Delhi Police in its show cause notice sent to Hyatt on 12 September, 2014, do exist or have been addressed by the hotel, the court said.
It further said the outcome of the verification be communicated to the petitioner and disposed of the petition.
Meanwhile, Hyatt submitted before the court that there are no deficiencies in its functioning and it has not violated any law.
It also said that it is willing to make any further improvements as may be suggested by the authorities.
The plea had been filed by the sister of a young man, Gaurav Rishi who had suffered serious injuries on the night of 16 October, 2013, when he fell from the hotel’s sixth floor to the fourth floor and was in a coma for several months. While allowing the petitioner’s side to inspect Hyatt, the court made it clear that the same will be for just one hour and should not obstruct the business of the hotel in any manner.
During the proceedings, senior advocate A S Chandhiok, appearing for Rishi, questioned how the licensing authority renewed the hotel’s licence on 19 June when on 4 June Delhi Police in its status report filed before the court had pointed out several deficiencies in Hyatt’s functioning.
The licensing authority in its affidavit had said that Hyatt had on June 2, 2014 submitted the municipal body’s health trade licence (HTL) and the No-Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Fire department for renewal of its lodging licence, as required under the law for running a place of public entertainment.
It had also said that Hyatt’s HTL was valid up to 31 March, 2015, and its NOC from the Fire department till 12 March, 2017, and since it had complied with these two mandatory requirements, the hotel’s lodging licence was renewed on 19 June, 2014, for the period from April 2014 to March 2015.
Delhi Police had in its show cause notice of 12 September sought a reply from Hyatt within 15 days i.e by 27 September, on why its lodging licence will not be revoked for ‘violations’ reported
by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) South District.
Next Story



