Netaji Subash Place Traders ... vs Delhi Development Authority ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 255 Del

$~J
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                                Reserved on: 19.01.2021
%                                            Pronounced on: 25.01.2021

+     W.P. (C) 1820/2020 & CM APPL. 6325/2020, 25907/2020

      NETAJI SUBASH PLACE TRADERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
      (REGD) THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT                ... Petitioner
                     Through   Mr.Mohit Mathur, Sr. Adv. with
                               Mr.Hemendra, Advs.
                     Versus
      DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS VICE
      CHAIRMAN & ORS.                             ... Respondents

Through Mr.Rajiv Bansal, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel and Mr.Partiosh Dhawan, Advs.

Mr.Anuj Aggarwal, ASC with Mr.Shikhar Sheel and Mr.Ayushi Bansal, Advs. for R-2 to R-5.

                               Ms.Mini      Pushkarna,        Standing
                               Counsel with Ms.Khusboo Nahr and
                               Ms.Latika Malhotra, Advs. for R-
                               6/NDMC.
      CORAM:
      HON' BLE MR. J USTICE J AYANT NATH
J AYANT NATH, J .

CM No.6325/2020

1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner Association seeking to revoke the process of e-auction of the commercial plots No. G-2, G-4 and plot No. G-1 at District Centre, Netaji Subhash Place, New Delhi. Reliefs are also sought to issue an appropriate mandamus to the respondents to provide detailed design of surface, multilevel parking and street parking

facilities along with the indicative locations of pedestrian areas, vendors, public amenities, toilets, green space, etc. and to follow the guidelines framed by the new MPD-2021.

2. CM No. 6325/2020 is filed by the petitioner seeking stay of the operation of complete process of e-auction of the above noted commercial plots through online bearing dated 17.02.2020 by DDA till the pendency and disposal of the writ petition.

3. On 19.02.2020, this court had passed the following order:-

"1. The petitioner association is aggrieved by the fact that the subject plots are being put to auction without addressing the problems of the traders and the occupants of the area vis.-a- .vis. traffic.

2. Insofar as the DDA is concerned, it shall deal with the pending representations of the petitioner association and the occupants. For this purpose, DDA will invite the representatives of the petitioner association and the resident/occupants for hearing.

3. The DDA will also take inputs from the experts to ease the traffic congestion in the subject area. In this behalf, the experts will be called upon to give their opinion concerning not only how to manage the traffic congestion in the subject area as it obtains currently but also how it is to be managed in the future as well given the increase in traffic density.

5. This exercise will be completed by the DDA within six weeks from the receipt of a copy of this order. Pending this exercise, while the auction process can go on, it will not be confirmed without permission of the Court.

6. For the aforesaid purpose, the officers of the North Delhi Municipal Corporation as well as Traffic Department of Delhi Police can also be called by the DDA for providing their

inputs.

......"

Hence the above order put a partial restraint on auction of the three plots in question.

4. DDA has filed CM No. 25907/2020 stating that the directions issued by this court vide order dated 19.02.2020 have been complied with by DDA as they have passed a speaking order dated 11.09.2020. It is stated that the writ petition be dismissed and the interim order be vacated.

5. In the accompanying writ petition, it is stated that the petitioner Association including the occupants and daily visitors of the said area are facing problem of scarcity of parking space at the Netaji Subhash Place, District Centre. The said area is extremely crowded with heavy footfalls of visitors on a regular basis due to various small and large corporate offices, MNCs, Banks, hospitals, etc. The parking system at Netaji Subhash Place is not managed properly on account of small parking places due to which the occupants/employees/clients/visitors suffer a lot. Representations were sent to DDA on 23.12.2010 and 05.05.2014.

6. It is further pleaded that despite such an alarming situation, respondent No. 1-DDA is bent upon making the auction of vacant commercial plots to general public which may result into more impediments, harm and congestion in the area. In fact, the respondent should have considered to convert the said commercial plots into proper multilevel parking lots or automated parking to accommodate the public at large to park their vehicles. It is stated that on completion of the auction of the commercial plots and upon further construction in the said area, the same will lead to toxics fumes, chemicals and oils, etc. severely affecting air,

water quality and public health. There is already a shortage of parking, lack of water, green area, proper infrastructure, etc. The authorities should take a decision after inviting proposals, representations and suggestions from the area occupants, residents or traders.

7. The matter was heard on 03.11.2020 when this court passed the following order:-

"I have heard learned senior counsel appearing for respondent DDA in part. I have been taken through the speaking order dated 11.09.2020 passed pursuant to the interim order of this court dated 19.02.2020.

In my opinion, it would be appropriate that respondent DDA place on record on affidavit the full picture/facts regarding parking area in question, namely, number of cars and other vehicles that are expected, number of sites that are available for such parking and their capacity to park vehicles and the impact of the auction of three new plots on the parking requirement within ten days from today. Rejoinder, if any, be filed within ten days thereafter."

8. In response to the above order of this court dated 03.11.2020, DDA has filed an additional affidavit dated 21.12.2020 enclosing an excel sheet where the calculations and the requirements of the parking lots have been shown as per MPD 2021. Para 4 of the additional affidavit dated 21.12.2020 reads as follows:-

"4. I thus say that a short fall of 392 parking might have occurred as per norms of 3 ECS due to (G-1, G-2 and G-4) 'Change of use premise and partial modification in earlier approved Development Controls of plots/units G-1, G-2 & G-4 in District Centre Netaji Subhash Place', which have been put for auction. I say that this shortfall can be addressed by converting the already existing surface parking into stack parking. It has been mentioned in the minutes of 378th SCM

that 'the balance parking requirement shall be taken care of in the pool/multilevel parking of District Centre', can be taken up subject to detail examination, feasibility and viability of the same. It is to be respectfully submitted that as per the available Layout Plan of District Centre there are surface parking lots (pool parking) located adjoining the boundary wall of District Centre along Ring Road. These parking lots can be rearranged to increase the number of surface parking (ECS) with proposal of stack parking system, if required, to balance the shortfall of parking occurred due to change of LOP of plots G-1, G-2 and G-4."

9. The excel sheet shows a deficiency of, at best, 858 parking lots.

10. I have heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned senior counsel for the respondents.

11. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the submissions stated in the writ petition. He has urged that the respondents have illegally changed the development controls and lifted the height restrictions. Earlier the area was a service-apartment plus commercial area and now, the entire area has been converted into commercial without caring for the facilities and infrastructure. Even the fire brigade can't move around, in case of an emergency if so required. It was posed to the learned senior counsel for the petitioner as to what exactly is the illegality perpetuated by DDA to warrant this court exercising powers to strike down the auction in question. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner relies upon the Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation stating that the residents/occupants of the buildings in the said area expect some basic facilities as per normal legitimate expectations.

12. Learned senior counsel for the respondents reiterates that they are committed to provide adequate parking facilities and infrastructure. He has

pointed out that there are 6 plots available for construction of multilevel car parking. These will generate more than 1600 car parking units, if auctioned. He assures the court that these plots would be auctioned for multilevel parking within approximately one month from today. Alternatively, he states that DDA may decide to construct the said multilevel parking from its own resources. In such an eventuality, the construction would commence within 3 to 4 months.

13. A perusal of the interim order dated 19.02.2020 would show that a direction was passed to DDA to invite representations of the petitioner association and the residents and occupants for a hearing while dealing with the pending representations of the petitioner association. DDA was also directed to take inputs from the experts to ease the traffic congestion in the subject area. The said entire exercise was to be completed within six weeks from the receipt of a copy of the order dated 19.02.2020. Pending this exercise, the auction process was permitted to go on but the confirmation of the auction could only take place with the permission of the court.

14. It is the case of the respondents that the aforesaid exercise has taken place and a speaking order has been passed on 11.09.2020 on the representations of the petitioner.

15. I may look at some of the relevant portions of the said speaking order dated 11.09.2020. The same read as follows:-

"Whereas the respondent authority (DDA) has detailed discussions/deliberations with the respective departments i.e. Planning Department, Architect Department and Traffic Police of Delhi on issue of parking /traffic highlight. It was pointed out by Arch. Department that due to construction of Metro Rail by DMRC adjoining boundary of Distt. Centre along-with Ring Road was blocked, which was providing direct access to the

Distt. Centre at its peripheral roads. To resolve problem of traffic congestion at the entry/exit points and smooth vehicular movement on outer ring road, part layout plan (modified layout plan) of the Distt. Centre along ring road has been prepared based on suggestions of Delhi Traffic police, PWD and DMRC, which will address the above issue/problem. NOC to the modified LOP/Part LOP has also been received from Additional Commissioner of Police (Traffic) vide their letter dt. 04.12.2019.

xxx After having been considered contentions of the petitioner association vis-a--vis ground realities, request of petitioner as made through the representation to stop public auction of three vacant plots of Netaji Subhash Place Distt. Centre till more parking space is created, has not merit, hence rejected accordingly."

16. As the court was not satisfied with the above noted speaking order dated 11.09.2020, this court had passed appropriate directions as noted above on 03.11.2020. The respondent have now filed an additional affidavit dated 21.12.2020 pursuant to the aforesaid order of this court dated 03.11.2020. The relevant portion of the additional affidavit reads as follows:-

"4. I thus say that a short fall of 392 parking might have occurred as per norms of 3 ECS due to (G-1, G-2 and G-4) 'Change of use premise and partial modification in earlier approved Development Controls of plots/units G-1, G-2 & G-4 in District Centre Netaji Subhash Place', which have been put for auction. I say that this shortfall can be addressed by converting the already existing surface parking into stack parking. It has been mentioned in the minutes of 378th SCM that 'the balance parking requirement shall be taken care of in the pool/multilevel parking of District Centre', can be taken up subject to detail examination, feasibility and viability of the

same. It is to be respectfully submitted that as per the available Layout Plan of District Centre there are surface parking lots (pool parking) located adjoining the boundary wall of District Centre along Ring Road. These parking lots can be rearranged to increase the number of surface parking (ECS) with proposal of stack parking system, if required, to balance the shortfall of parking occurred due to change of LOP of plots G-1, G-2 and G-4."

17. In addition, learned senior counsel for the respondents has assured that the issue of parking would be properly tackled. He has assured that there are six plots which will be auctioned within one month which will be used for multilevel parking. If for some reason DDA decides to construct the said multilevel parking on its own, an appropriate project would commence within three to four months. In my opinion, it is manifest that the respondents have assured the court that they will take meaningful measures to resolve the issue of parking. I bind DDA to the submissions made in court and also to the above noted contents of the additional affidavit dated 21.12.2020 filed by DDA. DDA will abide by the same.

18. As steps are being taken by DDA, no purpose is served by continuing the interim order dated 19.02.2020. This is especially so, as the plots in question have already been auctioned and the process is awaiting finalization/confirmation from this court for completion of the auction process. Accordingly, the interim order dated 19.02.2020 is vacated.

19. DDA will file a status report regarding the directions passed today within eight (8) weeks from today.

20. The application stands disposed of.

J AYANT NATH, J J ANUARY 25, 2021/rb