Rajwanti Deshwal Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

¶1

$~82

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 09^th October, 2025

¶4

- W.P.(C) 15508/2025, CM APPL. 63456/2025 & CM APPL. 63457/2025

¶5

RAJWANTI DESHWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Samman Vardhan Gautam, Ms. Khushi Sharma, Mr. Priyam Tiwari and Ms. Anshika, Advocates with petitioner in person. Mob: 7717730165 Email: [email protected]

¶6

versus

¶7

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Siddhant Nath, SC for MCD with Mr. Bhavishya Makhija, Mr. Amaan Khan, Advocates Mob: 9910870397 Email: [email protected]

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J ( ORAL ):

¶10

The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondent-Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”), to not take further action against the property of the petitioner, pursuant to the Demolition Order dated 09^th July, 2025.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent has issued the Demolition Order in utter violation of the Principles of Natural Justice, inasmuch as no Show Cause Notice has been

¶12

Signature Not Verified

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 2.10.2025 18:07:39

¶15

served upon the petitioner against the property bearing No. 6B/9, Ward No. 9, Kishangarh, New Delhi-110070, admeasuring 140 sq. yds., which is an old construction built in the shape of ground floor and first floor.

¶16

It is submitted that the respondent-MCD has already taken partial action on 06^th October, 2025.

¶17

It is submitted that since, there is no Presiding Officer in the Appellate Tribunal, MCD (“ATMCD”) currently, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶18

Responding to the present writ petition learned counsel appearing for the respondent vehemently denies the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. He has handed over certain documents, which are taken on record.

¶19

As per the respondent, a Show Cause Notice dated 19^th June, 2025 was issued, which was duly pasted outside the premises of the petitioner. Further, Demolition Order dated 09^th July, 2025 was also passed, which was also pasted outside the premises of the petitioner.

¶20

However, the aforesaid fact is denied by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on the ground that the said action has been taken at the behest of son of the petitioner and since, the residential address is same, the pasting of the Show Cause Notice and the Demolition Order is not in the premises of the petitioner, but on the portion of the premises of the son of the petitioner.

¶21

However, the aforesaid facts are disputed by learned counsel appearing for the respondent-MCD.

¶22

Be that as it may, this Court notes the fact that currently there is no Presiding Officer in the ATMCD. Further, this Court also takes note of the

¶23

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Page 2 of 3

¶25

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 2.10.2025 18:07:39

¶26

fact that demolition action has already been taken by the MCD on 06^th October, 2025.

¶27

Accordingly, only with a view to allow the petitioner to file an appeal before the ATMCD, it is directed that no further coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner, to allow the petitioner to file an appeal within a period of four weeks, from today.

¶28

In further consideration of the submissions made before this Court, it is directed that no further coercive action shall be taken against the property of the petitioner till hearing of the interim application by the learned ATMCD.

¶29

It is further directed that in case there is no Presiding Officer even at the time of filing of the appeal by the petitioner, the protection granted by today’s order shall automatically extend to the next date which is given by the ATMCD.

¶30

It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, which shall be decided by the ATMCD independently, after hearing the parties.

¶31

Rights and contentions of all the parties are left open, and are to be decided in appropriate proceedings.

¶32

With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition, along with the pending applications, is accordingly disposed of.

¶33

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶34

OCTOBER 9, 2025/ SK

¶35

Signature Not Verified

¶36

Page 3 of 3

¶37

Digitally Signed By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Da te:1 2.10.2025 18:07:39

Rajwanti Deshwal v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajwanti Deshwal v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sheeraj Projects Private Limited Vs National Highways Authority of India

Sheeraj Projects Private Limited Vs National Highways Authority of India

Hari Narain Aggarwal Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi through Its Chief Secretary & Ors.

Dr. Sana Rafi Vs Jamia Millia Islamia

Enviro Tech Ventures Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Rajbir Singh Goyat Vs Atul Sibal and Ors.

Sumit Sharma Vs Union of India and Ors.

Vindhyachal Expressway Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India through Ministry of Road Transport and Highways & Ors.

M S Alankit Assignments Ltd. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Maninder Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Basant Verma Vs Delhi Jal Board (Djb), through Its Chief Executive Officer & Anr.

Suresh Chand Kashiwal Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Arti Enterprises Vs Union of India & Ors.

Smt. Sayra & Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.