Delhi High Court
Sameer Malhotra And Another vs North Delhi Municipal ... on 23 February, 2022
$~26
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 23rd February, 2022
+ W.P.(C) 6174/2021& CM APPL. 19567/2021, CM APPL.
21342/2021, CM APPL. 30551/2021& CM APPL. 2067/2022
SAMEER MALHOTRA AND ANOTHER ..... Petitioners
versus
NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL
CORPORATION AND OTHER ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sunil Malhotra, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Ajjay Aroraa, Standing Counsel for North DMC
Mr. Lalit Gupta Adv. and Mr. Siddharth Arora Adv. for
Respondent Nos. 2-4.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner seeks a direction against the respondent-Corporation to
take action against the illegal unauthorized construction being carried out
over half portion measuring 288 sq. yards towards eastern side of the
property bearing No. 61/22, Ramjas Road, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005
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.
without any sanction plan or requisite permission.
3. Order dated 07.07.2021 records the contention of learned counsel
appearing for the municipal corporation that there was a sanctioned plan for
the building which was applied for under the Saral Scheme. Further, it was
contended that there were certain misrepresentations at the time of making
the application and accordingly action in accordance with law was
proposed to be taken.
4. Undertaking was given by the respondent no. 2 to 4 that no
construction shall be carried out till disposal of the show cause issued by
the Corporation seeking to revoke the sanction plan.
5. Order dated 22.07.2021 of this Court notes that as on that date
basement had been dug up and there was a possibility of a mishap because
of the ongoing rainy season. Accordingly, directions were issued to the
concerned engineer of the Municipal Corporation to suggest steps required
to ensure the safety of the area.
6. On 09.09.2021, it was pointed by learned counsel for the petitioner
that, despite the undertaking given to the Court, construction activity was
carrying on. This Court, noticing the photographs which were produced on
record and also the fact that respondents 2 to 4 had not stopped construction
despite three work stop notices issued by the Corporation, issued a notice to
show cause to Mr. Rachit Gupta/respondent no. 4 to show cause as to why
proceedings under the Contempt of Court Act be not initiated. Further, the
Corporation was directed to seal the property and not to permit any further
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.
construction thereafter.
7. Mr. Rachit Gupta had filed his affidavit tendering an unconditional
apology and also explaining that the construction that had been raised was
as per the advice given by his Architect and Engineer for the purposes of
protecting the basement by creation of a rigid box.
8. Noticing the said submissions officers of the Corporation were
directed to examine the same and submit a report as to whether the
contention of Mr. Rachit Gupta was correct or not.
9. Status report has been filed by the Corporation stating that part of
the construction was raised beyond what was recommended by the
Executive Engineer of the Corporation for purposes of protecting the
property.
10. Mr. Lalit Gupta, Advocate appearing for Mr. Rachit Gupta submits
that the error occurred on account of the advice given by the Engineer and
Architect and he unconditionally tender his apology for the same and
submits that he is willing be put to terms for the error committed by him.
11. It is pointed out that with regard to the revocation of the sanction
plan, respondent no. 2 and 3 have already approached the Appellate
Tribunal-MCD and proceedings are pending before the Appellate Tribunal-
MCD.
12. It is also pointed out that the petitioners have filed an application
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.
before the Appellate Tribunal-MCD in the appeal filed by respondent no. 2
and 3 and they are being heard by the Appellate Tribunal-MCD in those
proceedings.
13. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 to 4 further
volunteers that they shall fill up the entire basement to the satisfaction of
the engineers of the Corporation and further undertakes that no construction
activity shall be carried out in the subject property except in accordance
with the orders to be passed in the appeal by the Appellate Tribunal-MCD.
14. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the unconditional apology
tendered by respondent no. 4 is accepted, however, subject to payment of
costs of Rs. 75,000/-. The cost shall be deposited by the respondent no. 4
within a period of two weeks with the Horticulture Wing of the CPWD.
15. It is directed that the property shall be de-sealed by the municipal
corporation to enable respondent no. 2 to 4 to fill up the basement to the
satisfaction of the concerned executive engineer of the corporation.
16. Respondent no. 2 to 4 shall not change the status of the property or
carry out any construction activity except in accordance with the orders to
be passed by the Appellate Tribunal-MCD, if any.
17. It is clarified that Appellate Tribunal-MCD shall consider the appeal
of the respondent No. 2 and 3 in accordance with law without being
influenced by anything stated herein on merits.
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.
18. Further, the Horticulture Wing of the CPWD shall utilise the said
amount for the purposes of providing/improving the infrastructure/facilities
at the Buddha Jayanti Park located in the Central Ridge. Said work in the
Buddha Jayanti Park shall be carried out by the Horticulture Wing of the
CPWD in consultation with the concerned Deputy Conservator of Forests
(West Forest Division), Government of NCT of Delhi.
19. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. The notice of contempt is
also discharged.
20. List on 07.04.2022, for reporting progress by the CPWD. CPWD
shall also submit the proposal for providing/improving the
infrastructure/facilities in the Buddha Jayanti Park.
21. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be
also forwarded to learned counsels through email by the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
FEBRUARY 23, 2022
'rs'
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.
