This judgment dismissed an appeal filed against a writ petition that sought to restrain the Municipal Corporation of Delhi from erecting a retaining wall. The Court held that courts cannot substitute their opinion for technical experts regarding the integrity and safety engineering of a retaining wall.
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.
$~47
AZAD MARKET WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ANR ...... Appellant
Through: Mr. Rajiv Bajaj and Mr. Vidur Marwah, Advocates
versus
STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) THROUGH ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF & ORS. ..... Respondent Through: Ms Shobhana Takiar, Standing Counsel, DDA with Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Advocate Mr. Tushar Sannu, Standing Counsel, MCD with Mr. Manoviraj Singh, Advocate and Mr. Gaurav Kumar, AE (Project)
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, ACJ : (ORAL)
CM APPL. 25720/2024 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
LPA 350/2024
LPA 350/2024 Page 1 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MAHIMA SHARMA Signing Da te:0 4.05.2024 11:33:28
stands extended to the High Court of Delhi, challenging the impugned judgment dated 14th March, 2024, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 1149/2022, dismissing the said petition filed by the Appellants herein i.e., the residents/shops owners of Beri Wala Bagh/Azad Market Chowk, seeking restraint against the Respondent – Municipal Corporation of Delhi (‘MCD’) from erecting a wall in front of the Appellants’ properties for the purpose of construction of an under-pass.
1.1. The learned Single Judge, while dismissing the petition has observed that the Court does not act as an Appellate Authority over the decisions taken by the Municipalities and more particularly when Schemes are envisaged for the planned development of the city.
1 Road under bridge
LPA 350/2024 Page 2 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MAHIMA SHARMA Signing Da te:0 4.05.2024 11:33:28
LPA 350/2024 Page 3 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MAHIMA SHARMA Signing Da te:0 4.05.2024 11:33:28
the Appellants is not an ordinary wall, but a Retaining Wall. The MCD has sufficiently explained that the integrity of the Retaining Wall cannot be tampered with by carving out spaces in it as it has an important role in holding the earth's pressure.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
MAY 2, 2024/ rhc/aa
LPA 350/2024 Page 4 of 4
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MAHIMA SHARMA Signing Da te:0 4.05.2024 11:33:28
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can substitute its opinion for technical experts and allow gates in a retaining wall without appreciating safety concerns.
Whether the appellants are entitled to carve out spaces in a retaining wall to access pavement and a school despite the wall being constructed according to engineering standards.
Whether the appellants merit a limited relief for access through a retaining wall while the wall itself is structurally sound and necessary for earth pressure containment.
AZAD MARKET WELFARE ASSOCIATION & ANR
STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) THROUGH ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF & ORS.
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
