Delhi High Court
Ashima Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd vs South Delhi Municipal ... on 14 May, 2013
Author: G. S. Sistani
$~31.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: May 14, 2013
+ W.P.(C) 7831/2012
ASHIMA INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.B.L. Wali, Adv.
versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through : Ms.Biji Rajesh, Adv. for MCD.
Ms.Zubeda Begum and Ms.Sana Ansari,
Advs. for Traffic Police.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
G.S.SISTANI, J. (Oral)
1. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles 226
and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ, order or direction to
the respondent to permit the petitioner to run the car/scooter parking site
at DLF Place, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi or allot an alternate parking site to
the petitioner in lieu of the car/scooter parking site DLF Place, Vasant
Kunj, New Delhi, allotted to the petitioner.
2. The necessary facts, to be noticed for disposal of the present writ petition,
are that the respondent had allotted a parking site to the petitioner, which
is a company, at Saket District Centre. Since the area of the parking site
was reduced by the respondent on account of various problems created by
the market association, the petitioner made a representation to the
respondent to allot an alternate parking site in lieu of the area reduced
from the parking site allotted to the petitioner at Saket District Centre.
The respondent vide its communication dated 22.6.2009 had informed the
petitioner that the case of the petitioner had been considered by the
competent authority for allotment of an alternate parking site in lieu of
reduced area from the parking site of Saket District Centre. It is also the
case of the petitioner that the respondent had also considered three
alternate parking sites. The respondent handed over the physical
possession of the Car/Scooter parking site at DLF Place, Vasant Kunj,
New Delhi, to the petitioner on 31.12.2009, which was duly taken over by
the Director of the petitioner company on 31.12.2009 as per the terms and
conditions of the contract and as per the map. The respondent vide
communication dated 31.12.2009 also informed the SHO, Police Station
Vasant Kunj, that a parking site at DLF Place Vasant Kunj has been
allotted to the petitioner and possession thereof has been handed over to
the petitioner on 31.12.2009. The respondent also requested the SHO to
extend full cooperation to the petitioner for smooth functioning of the
parking site. The petitioner deposited monthly license fee of Rs.7,83,195/-
with the respondent from 22.1.2010 to 9.6.2010 in the proportion of
Rs.1,23,961/- for the month of January, 2010; Rs.40,900/- and
Rs.2,47,382/- for the month of February, 2010, to March, 2010;
Rs.1,23,787/- for the month of April, 2010; Rs.1,23,715/- for the month of
June, 2010, respectively, for which respondent issued receipts to the
petitioner. The respondent vide letter dated 21.2.2012, while referring to
the letter dated 30.12.2009, pertaining to the parking site at DLF Place,
requested the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Traffic) to issue a
clearance certificate of the said site except the front road (one side) at the
earliest. The respondent vide another letter dated 21.2.2010 informed the
SHO, Police Station Vasant Kunj, that the parking site in question has
been allotted to the petitioner on monthly license fee of Rs.1,21,000/- plus
TCS, and also requested to. Subsequently the respondent vide letter dated
14.3.2012 informed the SHO, Police Station Vasant Vihar, that the letter
issued on 21.2.2012, whereby the parking site at DLF Place was allotted
to the petitioner, has been withdrawn with immediate effect. On 9.4.2012
the petitioner informed the respondent that the parking site in question
was allotted by the respondent to the petitioner but due to certain
administrative reasons the parking site could not be operated and the
respondent again allotted the parking site in question to the petitioner.
Vide letter dated 21.02.2012 the petitioner further informed that the
operation of the parking site in question could not be operated by the
petitioner and the respondent has withdrawn the allotment of the said
parking site in question from the petitioner. The petitioner also requested
the respondent to adjust the MLF into the next year's advance MLF for
the parking site at Ajmal Khan Road-1. The respondent informed the
DDA about the decision taken by the Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor dated
17.4.2012 in a meeting held in March, 2012 that all parking sites run by
the MCD or DDA owned land be handed over to the DDA (and vice
versa) by 31.3.2012. The respondent requested the DDA that the parking
sites already handed over to the DDA may be returned to the respondent
and process of handing over of the parking sites wherein services have
already been transferred to MCD may be expedited and parking site,
which was to be handed over to the DDA may be withheld. The petitioner
vide letters dated 11.8.2012, 10.9.2012 and 10.12.2012 informed the
respondent that a Court case is pending between the DDA and MCD in
respect of the parking site in question. The petitioner requested the
respondent to look into the matter and hand over the physical possession
of the parking site under intimation to police authorities and DDA to
cooperate with the petitioner in smooth operation of the parking site in
question.
3. By the present writ petition the petitioner accordingly prays for a direction
to the respondent to permit the petitioner to run car/scooter parking site at
DLF Place, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. When the writ petition came up for
hearing a list of seven sites were handed over to the counsel for the
respondent in Court. On 06.02.2013 a statement was made by counsel for
the respondent that it was not possible for them to grant any alternate site
to the petitioner as the seven sites suggested already stood allotted. In the
order of 15.03.2013 it was noticed that the parking site allotted to the
petitioner at DLF Place, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi was withdrawn as
clearance was not granted by the Traffic Police. Copies of letters were
placed on record by the MCD to show that MCD has been writing to the
Traffic Police to grant the no objection. The Court also noticed in its
order dated 15.03.2013 that to cut short the controversy and to avoid
multiplicity of proceedings, DCP (Traffic) was directed to look into the
matter and decide within two weeks as to whether it was possible for them
to grant NOC or not. A status report has been filed by the DCP (Traffic)
South; the relevant portion whereof reads as under:-
"2. .........The Traffic Inspector Vasant Vihar Circle
after inspection of the site found that the area proposed by
the MCD for parking is being used for the circulation of
the vehicles around the DLF Malls and parking of the
vehicles will cause obstruction and affect the circulation of
vehicles adversely. Besides circulation, it was also
observed that proposed land belongs to DDA.
3. Subsequently, the MCD, cancelled the said allotment
and letter No.OSD/RPC/2012/D-1392 dated 21/02/2012
was withdrawn vide letter No.OSD/(RPC) 2012/D-1467
dated 14/03/2012.
4. In view of above it was recommended by the Traffic
Inspector Vasant Vihar Circle that the proposal of SDMC
is not acceptable and it may not be permitted."
4. In view of the report submitted by the Deputy Commissioner of Police
(Traffic), Southern Range, the prayer made in the writ petition cannot be
allowed as the suitability of the site lies purely in the domain of the
Traffic Police and according to the status report the site is not suitable for
parking purposes. Grant of an alternate site and other disputes raised by
the petitioner are purely commercial disputes and subject matters of
agreement signed between the parties, which cannot be decided in the writ
proceedings.
5. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
CM 19705/2012
6. Since the writ petition is disposed of, instant application seeking interim
relief till disposal of the writ petition is disposed of as infructuous.
(G.S.SISTANI)
JUDGE
MAY 14, 2013
msr //dk//
