Delhi High Court
M/S Jc Decaux Advertising India ... vs South Delhi Municipal ... on 12 October, 2021
$~32
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 12.10.2021
+ W.P.(C) 11726/2021
M/S JC DECAUX ADVERTISING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
..... Petitioner
Through
versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.
..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Mr. Upvan and Mr. Ranjit K. Singh,
Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Tushar Sannu, Standing Counsel with Ms. Ankita
Bhadouriya, Advocate for SDMC.
Mr. Tarun Johri and Ankur Gupta, Advocates for R-
4/DMRC (Through VC)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
CM. APPL. 36244/2021 (Exemption)
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 11726/2021 & CM. APPL. 36243/2021
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:13.10.2021
Signing Date:13.10.2021 18:38:43 14:59
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
2. Petitioner impugns notice of demand dated 14.09.2021, issued
by the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) whereby a
demand has been raised in the sum of Rs.6,08,02,080/- as amount
payable towards the revenue earned through advertisements.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
was granted permission by the SDMC vide letter dated 13.01.2013,
when the Outdoor Advertisement Policy, 2007 was in force. He
submits that respondents are seeking a higher revenue share based on
the Outdoor Advertisement Policy, 2017, which is not applicable to
the case of the petitioner.
4. He submits that a detailed representation has been given on
08.09.2021 in response to an earlier letter of 23.08.2021. Petitioner
has further given a response to the impugned notice of the demand
dated 14.09.2021 on 24.09.2021 and 04.10.2021. He submits that
petitioner has requested the respondents for a personal hearing and not
to take coercive action till the personal hearing is granted and a
speaking order is passed.
5. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing
for respondents.
6. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 submits that
respondent shall grant a personal hearing to the petitioner and
thereafter, pass a detailed speaking order. He further submits, under
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:13.10.2021
Signing Date:13.10.2021 18:38:43 14:59
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
instructions that till the passing of the speaking order, no coercive
action in terms of order dated 14.09.2021 shall be taken.
7. The statement is taken on record
8. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of, directing
respondent No.1 to grant a personal hearing to the petitioner and
thereafter pass a detailed speaking order on the objection raised by the
petitioner to the impugned demand notice dated 14.09.2021.
9. It is further directed that if the order is adverse to the petitioner,
said order shall not be enforced for a period of two weeks after
communication of the same to enable the petitioner to avail of his
remedies in accordance with law.
10. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
11. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and
be also forwarded to learned counsels through e-mail by the Court
Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
OCTOBER 12, 2021
NA
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:13.10.2021
Signing Date:13.10.2021 18:38:43 14:59
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
