Delhi High Court
Satish Kumar vs Commissioner, South Delhi ... on 3 May, 2021
$~22
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 03.05.2021
+ W.P.(C) 5108/2021 & CM APPL.15654/2021
SATISH KUMAR ..... Petitioner
versus
COMMISSIONER, SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
AND OTHERS .....Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. M.S.Bammi with Mr. Arjun Goel, Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing Counsel,
SDMC/R-1 & 2.
Mr. Kushagra Pandey, Panel Counsel (Civil),
GNCTD, R-3/SHO, P.S.Hari Nagar.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner seeks a direction to respondent Corporation as well as
the SHO, Police Station Hari Nagar to stop respondent No.4 from
continuing with the illegal and unauthorised construction in property
bearing No.WZ-VB-137, Gali No.6, Virender Nagar, New Delhi.
Further direction is sought to respondent Nos.1 & 2 to demolish the
unauthorised construction and respondent No.3 to provide assistance
in demolition of the construction.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:04.05.2021 09:44:48 W.P(C) 5108/2021 Page 1
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 & 2 -
Corporation vehemently opposes the issuance of notice. He submits
that the petition has been filed without verifying true facts and by
making false allegations. He submits that construction plan has been
sanctioned under the saral scheme.
4. It is submitted that in the present time of pandemic subject
petition has been filed alleging illegal unauthorised construction and
the officers of the respondent Corporation have had to verify the
factual matrix of the matter.
5. He submits that since there is a sanctioned plan, no action can
be taken against the subject property at this stage. It is only after
completion of the construction, when completion certificate is applied
that the Corporation officers are obliged to inspect the property and to
verify the construction, unless illegal unauthorised construction is
apparent on the face of it.
6. Learned counsel submits that on inspection of the property
there was no illegal unauthorised construction apparent on the face of
it. He submits that action in accordance with law would be taken at
the appropriate stage, if required.
7. The statement is taken on record.
8. In view of the fact that subject petition has been filed without
verification of correct facts and by alleging that there is no sanction
plan, when there is one, I deem it expedient to dismiss the petition by
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:04.05.2021 09:44:48 W.P(C) 5108/2021 Page 2
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
imposing cost of Rs.5000/- on the petitioner.
9. The petition is accordingly dismissed, with costs of Rs. 5,000/-.
10. Copy of the Order be uploaded on the High Court website and
be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
MAY 03, 2021/rk
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL
MAGGU
Signing Date:04.05.2021 09:44:48 W.P(C) 5108/2021 Page 3
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
