Delhi High Court
Ankit Dabas vs North Delhi Municipal ... on 23 February, 2022
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 23.02.2022
+ W.P.(C) 1398/2021 & CM. APPL. 3983/2021
ANKIT DABAS ..... Petitioner
versus
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.
..... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Ms. Anusuya Salwan, Mr. Abhishek Pundir, Ms. Nikita
Salwan, Mr. Bankim Garg and Mr. Chaitanya Bansal,
Advocates.
For the Respondent: Mr. Anand Prakash, Standing Counsel, North DMC with
Ms. Varsha Arya & Mr. Akhil Raj Advocates for North
DMC
Mr. Vipul Pankaj Sanghi, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Arya and Mr. Gaurav Chaudhry,
Advocates for R-4.
Mr. Deepanshu Khatri, Advocate for the Society.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:23.02.2022
Signing Date:23.02.2022 23:01:20 21:40
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
2. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent/Corporation to
take action against the illegal unauthorized construction carried out by
respondent No.4 in Flat No.4A, Sandeep Cooperative Group Housing
Society, Plot No.35, Rohini, Sector-13, Delhi.
3. Status report has been filed by the Corporation stating that the
unauthorized construction has been booked and a demolition order
has been passed. However, demolition could not take place as there
was non-availability of police force.
4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 submits that not
only respondent No.4, but several other flat owners have also made
similar additions/alterations in their flats.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.4 objects to the
maintainability of the petition on the ground that the petitioner has
adopted a 'pick and choose policy'.
6. This is disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner, who
submits that the property of the petitioner is right adjoining the
property of respondent No.4 and petitioner is directly affected by the
illegal construction raised.
7. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 submits that since others
have also made similar additions, action cannot be taken against his
property alone.
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:23.02.2022
Signing Date:23.02.2022 23:01:20 21:40
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
8. I am unable to accept the contention of learned counsel for
respondent No.4 on the principle of negative equality. One who
allegedly raises unauthorized construction cannot resist the action
proposed by the Municipal Corporation solely on the ground of
inaction of the Corporation qua other illegal and unauthorized
constructions in the society.
9. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3/society submits
that since several of the occupants of the society have made similar
construction, an application for regularization has been filed by the
Corporation and the same is pending.
10. Learned counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that he
has no instructions with regard to pendency of any such application.
11. Be that as it may, since the status report of the Corporation
states that the construction is unauthorized and illegal, demolition
order has been passed and action in accordance with law is being
taken, this petition is disposed of, binding the Corporation down to
the statement made in the status report that appropriate action in
accordance with law shall be taken.
12. However, it is clarified that that in case any regularization
application has been filed by the society, the same be considered by
the Corporation expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:23.02.2022
Signing Date:23.02.2022 23:01:20 21:40
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
and subject to the outcome of the regularization application, further
action be taken in accordance with law.
13. Further, direction is issued to respondent No.2, the concerned
police officers to provide appropriate police force, if so requested by
the Corporation in accordance with law.
14. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
15. 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
FEBRUARY 23, 2022
NA
Digitally Signed
Signature Not Verified By:JUSTICE SANJEEV
Digitally Signed By:KUNAL SACHDEVA
MAGGU Signing Date:23.02.2022
Signing Date:23.02.2022 23:01:20 21:40
This file is digitally signed by PS
to HMJ Sanjeev Sachdeva.
