Disposed

Kunal Tanwar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC12 Aug 2024W.P.(C)/2522/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ of certiorari to quash a notice to close an industrial unit in Basai Darapur, Delhi, claiming it was a permitted area. The Court found the area remains non-confirming. Petitioner was only granted liberty to approach the Corporation if the area is eventually declared conforming.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to approach the respondent-Corporation if the area is declared a conforming industrial area.

Kunal Tanwar & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors. — Property and Title | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 2522/2020, CM APPL. 8835/2020

¶4

KUNAL TANWAR & ORS .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Varun Tyagi, Mr. Ishan Srivastava, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA & ORS .....Respondent

¶8

Through: CORAM:

¶9

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 12.08.2024

¶12

The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶13

“a)Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the notice dated 21.11.2019/22.11.19 issued by Respondent No. 3 being contrary to the provisions of the Master Plan Delhi, 2021 and also order dt. 27.02.2020 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, MOD; b) Issue a writ, order and/or direction to Respondent No.3 directing them to not act pursuant to the impugned notice dated 21.11.2019/22.11.19 and not to seal/close the Premises/Unit of the Petitioners situated at Industrial Cluster at Basai Darapur, Delhi; c) Pass such further and other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶14

The status report placed on record by the respondent-Corporation would indicate that the action in question has been taken in pursuance of the directions passed by the Supreme Court in W.P. (C) No. 4677/1985 titled as M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Ors . vide order dated 24.08.2018. As per the decision taken by the respondent, the industrial activities operating in

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/08/2024 at 12:58:18

¶17

residential/non-confirming area have been directed to be closed. Paragraph no.6 of the status report filed by the respondent-Corporation would indicate that the subject matter of the unit in question falls under the non-permitted area where no industrial/commercial activity is permitted. The concerned paragraph reads as below:-

¶18

“6. That vide Notification dated 31.05.2005, guidelines were issued byGovt of NCTD for declaring non-conforming industrial clusters fit for carrying out industrial activities for re-development and identificationof industrial clusters. It is pertinent to mention herein that aclarification with respect to the sustainability of notification dated31.05.2005 against BasaiDarapurwas sought from the DeputyCommissioner (Industries), Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD) inwhich it has been clarified, that, the area of BasaiDarapur is not beingconsidered as a re-development area and action as per the directionsgiven by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Monitoring Committeemay be taken against them. Acopy of clarification dated.11.01.2019sought from. the Deputy Commissioner (Industries), GNCTD asannexed as Annexure -D”.

¶19

It is stated by the respondent that the area in question i.e. Basai Darapur, Delhi continues to remain in non-confirming area and till date there has been no change in its position. The unaltered position has been reaffirmed by an additional status report filed by the respondent-Corporation on 21.03.2024 as per directions of this Court vide order dated 28.07.2023, wherein, the 48^th progress report of the Monitoring Committee was brought on record. The same has been annexed as Annexure-B to the said additional status report and the earlier stand of the committee has been reiterated i.e., to close down illegal activities running in residential/non-conforming areas of Delhi.

¶20

Learned counsel who appears for the petitioner, however, places on record a newspaper publication wherein it was published that Delhi Government has decided to develop 25 notified non-confirming industrial

¶21

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/08/2024 at 12:58:18

¶22

areas in the next 5 years.He, therefore, based on the newspaper clipping, submits that the process for declaration of the area in question to be a conforming industrial area is underway.

¶23

The Court has considered the material evidence on record and the position which has been taken by the respondent which is substantiated by the Monitoring Committee Report clearly indicates that as of now, the area in question is a non-confirming area and so long as the area in question is declared a conforming industrial area, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief in the instant writ petition.

¶24

The Court, however, grants liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent-Corporation, if in case, the area in question is declared as a conforming industrial area. The respondent-Corporation, thereafter, is bound to take necessary steps in accordance with law.

¶25

With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition stands disposed of.

¶26

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J

¶27

AUGUST 12, 2024/KG

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/08/2024 at 12:58:18

Kunal Tanwar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunal Tanwar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sga Power Systems Limited & Anr. Vs Bharat Electronics Limited & Anr.

Hitender Kumar Shokeen Vs Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Anr.

Zydus Takeda Healthcare Private Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Shyamvir Singh Tyagi Vs U.O.I & Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Malvinder Kuar Vs Director of Director of Education & Ors.

Jeet Kumar & Ors. Vs Bses Rajdhani Power Limited

Smt. Anuradha Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Hitender Kumar Shokeen Vs Bses Rajdhani Power Ltd. & Anr.

Delhi Vocational School Society Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Pukhraj Singh Chug Vs the Commissioner Municipal Corporation of Delhi MCD & Ors.

Piccadily Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs Shaolin Visual Communications

Imran Khan Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors.

Manak Chand Vs Dayawanti