This is an interim order allowing an inspection and action against illegal construction, and granting liberty to move for regularization within a time limit.
Liberty granted to respondent no.3 to move for regularization; all action to be completed within 10 weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~12
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Versus
SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS
| .... | . Respon | dents | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Through | Mr.Rajan Tyagi, | ASC w | ith Mr. |
| Yashwant Kumar 1/SDMC. |
, A.E. |
for R- |
|
| Mr.Sanjeev Sabh |
arwal | Standing | |
| Counsel with M | r. Hem | Kumar, | |
| Advocate for DDA | and Mr. | Ravinder | |
| Singh A.E. | |||
| Mr.Dhruv Mohan | and Mr | .Birender | |
| Bikram, Advocates | for R-3. |
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
O R D E R % 09.03.2017
Petitioner is not present at the second call. At the first call a pass over had been sought on behalf of the respondents.
Petitioner is aggrieved by the illegal and unauthorized constructions permitted to respondent no.3 at Flat No.07, LIG, First Floor, Pul Pehlad Pur, New Delhi. He has approached the concerned authorities time and again and his grievance has not yet been
addressed. On the last date a direction had been given to the respondent no.2/DDA as the stand of the respondent no.1/SDMC was that it is the DDA who has to carry out the enforcement, if any, qua this property. This Court had noted the contrary contentions of the statutory bodies i.e. of the SDMC and the DDA. They had been directed to obtain instructions in this regard. Today it has been informed to the Court by the DDA that it would a joint action which would be taken both by DDA and the SDMC together. This Court notes that on an earlier date a demolition programme qua this flat had been fixed for 28.5.2010. Learned counsel appearing for DDA submits that a fresh inspection shall be carried out; illegal deviations, if any, shall be booked and further action in accordance with law will be completed and taken to its ultimate goal. This stand of respondent no.2/DDA coupled with the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1/SDMC is taken on record. It is hoped and expected that this commitment of the respondents shall be honoured in true letter and spirit.
Counsel for respondent no.3 submits that he will be moving an appropriate application before the statutory authorities (who at present would be DDA) seeking regularization of this property. This liberty is granted to him and this application shall be answered in accordance with law. All action taken qua this property shall be completed within an outer limit of 10 weeks from today.
Learned counsel for respondent no.2/DDA points out that property of the petitioner also appears to have certain illegal deviation; actions will be taken in accordance with law. Police
assistance shall be given to the statutory authorities as and when desired.
Petition disposed of.
INDERMEET KAUR, J
MARCH 09, 2017 ndn
Shaila Devi
South Delhi Municipal Corporation
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Development Corporation (DDA)
Respondent no.3
Indermeet Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
