Disposed

Panchshila Co-Operative House Building Society Ltd. v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Delhi HC5 Dec 2019W.P.(C)/10597/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought mandamus directing the South Delhi Municipal Corporation to take action against respondents for violating Para 15 of MPD-2021 regarding a mixed-use property. The court noted notices were already issued and directed the corporation to initiate appropriate action after hearing the owners.

What did the court decide?

none granted; petitioner leaves the matter to the Municipal Corporation's discretion to initiate action after hearing.

Panchshila Co-Operative House Building Society… — Municipal and Town Planning | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Date of decision: 5^th December, 2019

¶4

- W.P.(C) 10597/2018

¶5

PANCHSHILA CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD. ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashim Shridhar and Ms. Niyati Patwardhan, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS.

¶8

..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sriharsha Peechara, Standing Counsel-South Delhi Municipal Corporation with Ms. Kriti Sinha, Adv.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR

¶10

¶11

O R D E R 05.12.2019

¶12

D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)

¶13

W.P.(C) 10597/2018

¶14

This writ petition has been preferred with the following prayers:

¶15

“(a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/order or direction in favour of the Petitioner directing Respondent No. 1 SDMC to take appropriate action against respondent no. 2, 3 and 4 under Para 15.9 and Para 15.11 of the MPD-2021 for

¶16

W.P.(C) 10597/2018

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

violations of Mixed Use Regulations given under Para 15 of MPD-2021 in the basement and third floor of property situated at Plot E-41, Panchsheel Park, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi-110017.

¶19

(b) Pass any other and further orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit under the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of tine Petitioner and against the Respondents.”

¶20

It is alleged by the petitioner that the respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 are using their property in violation of the Master Plan for Delhi-2021. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that suffice it will be for the disposal of this writ petition if a suitable direction is given to respondent no.1 (South Delhi Municipal Corporation) to initiate actions against respondent nos. 2, 3 and 4 for alleged breach of Master Plan for Delhi-2021.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that South Delhi Municipal Corporation has already issued notices upon the concerned respondents for the alleged breach of Master Plan for Delhi-2021. We, therefore, expect from the respondent no.1 – South Delhi Municipal Corporation that they will initiate appropriate actions against the delinquent respondents, if there is any breach of Master Plan for Delhi-2021. The requisite actions will be initiated by the South Delhi Municipal Corporation in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Government policy applicable to the facts of the case and after giving an adequate opportunity of being heard to the owners/occupiers of the superstructure.

¶22

W.P.(C) 10597/2018

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

With these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.

¶25

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶26

C.HARI SHANKAR, J.

¶27

DECEMBER 05, 2019/ kr

¶28

W.P.(C) 10597/2018

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Panchshila Co-Operative House Building Society Ltd. v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panchshila Co-Operative House Building Society Ltd. v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anuradha Sethi Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 10(2) Delhi

Dr. Nand Kishore Garg Vs the Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Lalit Kumar Rawal Vs the Registrar General, High Court of Delhi & Anr.

Dubai Islamic Bank Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Appreciate Fincap Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Commssioner of Income Tax

Head Constable Vijay Kumar Vs Union of India and Anr.

Consortium of Siemens Ltd. India, Siemens Sa Spain and Siemens Ag Germany and Ors. Vs Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Ltd. and Anr.

Consortium of Siemens Ltd. India, Siemens Sa Spain and Siemens Ag Germany and Ors. Vs Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Ltd. and Anr.

Dr. Nand Kishore Garg Vs the Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Court on Its Own Motion Vs Delhi Jal Board & Ors.

Uchit Dar Dukandar Avam Upbhokta Association Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

National Alliance of People S Movement and Ors. Vs Delhi Development Authority and Ors.

Anterrashtriya Upabohkta Vs Union of India and Ors.

Vivek Talwar & Anr. Vs Amit Talwar & Ors.