Disposed

Pankaj Sharma v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Delhi HC3 Feb 2020W.P.(C)/1393/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a PIL regarding illegal construction and unauthorized business activities at Haus Khaz Village, the Court directed the South Delhi Municipal Corporation to give a hearing to owners/occupiers of specified properties to decide legality before taking action, dismissing the immediate prayer for sealing and demolition without local inquiry.

What did the court decide?

Directed South Delhi Municipal Corporation to give opportunity of hearing to owners/occupiers of specified premises to decide legality of construction and businesses; cost to parties.

Pankaj Sharma Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation and… — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2020)

¶1

$~6

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Date of Decision: 03.02.2020

¶4

W.P.(C) 1393/2013 PANKAJ SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through: None versus

¶5

SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS

¶6

..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Standing Counsel with Mr.Ajjay Aroraa & Mr. Kapil Dutta, Advs. for SDMC/R-1 Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC with Mr.Anshuman Kumar, Adv. for R-2 & R-18 Mr. Anirudh Tyagi, Adv. for R-3, R-21, R-23 & R-37. Ms. Anju Lal & Ms. Shalu Lal, Advs. for R-6 Mr. Ajay Digpaul, CGSC with Mr. Aaryan Verma, Adv. for R-17 Mr. Ajay Verma, SSC with Ms. G.S. Oberoi & Mr. Ankur Sharma, Advs. for DDA Mr. Anish Khanna & Mr.Lakshay Mehta, Advs. for Employees of Bars, Pubs, Restaurant, etc. Dr. Lalit Bhasin, Ms. Ratna Dwivedi Dhingra, Ms.Annanya Marwah, Advs. for National Restaurant Association of India

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

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

¶9

JUDGMENT

¶10

D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)

¶11

When the matter is called out nobody appears for the petitioner.

¶12

W.P.(C) 1393/2013 Page 1 of 3

¶13

We have heard the counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3, 6, 18, 21, 23 and 37. We have also heard the counsel for Delhi Development Authority. It appears that there are several allegations against respondent Nos. 3 to 7 about the illegal construction and illegal use of the construction at property Nos. 8A, 40, 45A, 50A, 50B, 50C, 50D, 50E and 50F, Haus Khaz Village.

¶14

The prayers in this Public Interest Litigation read as under:

¶15

“(a) Issue a writ/direction/order in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Respondents No.1 & 2 to take immediate and prompt and appropriate legal action of sealing and demolition against the illegal and unauthorized construction by Respondent No. 3 to 7 in the Properties No.8A, 40, 45A, 50A, 50B, 50C, 50D, 50E and 50F, Haus Khaz Village, New Delhi.

¶16

(b) Issue a writ/direction/order in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the Respondents No.1 & 2 to take immediate and prompt and appropriate legal action under law against the illegal running of restaurants, pubs, bars and cafes etc. by the Respondent Nos.8 to 42 in Khaus Khaz Village, New Delhi since the said business is being run without procuring the requisite permission, licenses, NOC from the concerned authorities.

¶17

(c) Pass any other and further order/relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondents.”

¶18

It appears that the legality or otherwise of the construction cannot be decided in the writ petition as proper, cogent and convincing evidences are required to be led before the concerned trial court. It has been pointed out by respondent No.6 that they are not running any Restaurant, Pub, Bar etc. at the premises mentioned in this writ petition and the said premises are in fact vacant offices.

¶19

W.P.(C) 1393/2013 Page 2 of 3

¶20

We, therefore, direct respondent No.1 – South Delhi Municipal Corporation to give adequate opportunity of being heard to the owners/occupiers of the premises which are mentioned in the memo of this writ petition situated at Hauz Khas, New Delhi and thereafter respondent No.1 will decide legality or otherwise of the construction in question in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Government policy applicable to the facts of the present case. If the respondent No.1 comes to the conclusion that the construction carried out by respondent Nos.3 to 7 are illegal, the same shall be demolished by the respondents in accordance with law, rules, regulations and Government policy applicable to the facts of the present case as early as possible and practicable.

¶21

The petitioner is at liberty to move this Court in case of any difficulty by way of fresh litigation.

¶22

In view of the aforesaid observations, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶23

C.M. Nos.2621/2013 & 36002/2017

¶24

In view of the final order passed in W.P.(C) 1393/2020, both the applications stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶25

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶26

C.HARI SHANKAR, J

¶27

FEBRUARY 03, 2020/ns

¶28

W.P.(C) 1393/2013 Page 3 of 3

Pankaj Sharma v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Sharma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Shyamo Devi Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Dayanand Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Rajeev and Anr. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Dewan Chand Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Mohammad Ikhalaque Vs Uioin of India & Ors.

Sh. Vinod Kumar Jain Vs Registrar of Cooperative Societies and Anr.

Jai Shankar Kirpa Mahavidhyalaya Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Madhulata Mallick Vs New Delhi Municipal Council (Ndmc) and Ors.

Dilshad Bux Vs Shabnam Bagum

Shri Anand Kumar Rana and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Delhi Labour Union Vs Union of India

Iqbal Chauhan Vs Social & Tinur Restaurant Thr Satyajit Dhingra & Ors.

M/S J. P. Impex Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex and Ors.

Shrikant Prasad Vs Delhi Police