Pineview Technology Private Limited Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Ors.

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 15617/2024 & CM APPL. 65570/2024

¶4

PINEVIEW TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Dhruv Gautam, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER & ORS. .....Respondents

¶7

Through: Mr. Manu Chaturvedi, SC for MCD Mob: 9315827955 Email: [email protected] Ms. Madhu Sudan Bhayana, Advocate for R-6 Mob: 9891617861 Email: [email protected] Mr. Parv K. Garg, Mr. Mohd. Osama, Mr. Shahzar Qureshi, Advocates for R-7 Mob: 9873403692 Email: [email protected]

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

¶9

O R D E R % 01.09.2025

¶10

1. The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:

¶11

“a. Pass an order / direction / writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondents No. 1 & No. 2 to establish and operationalize the “online portal” provided for in Clause 9 (ii) of the “Guidelines for handling end of life vehicles in public places of Delhi, 2024”, so that process of release & scrapping of vehicles is properly facilitated between the Enforcement Agencies, RVSFs and the Vehicle Owners ;

¶12

b. Pass an order / direction / writ in the nature of Certiorari,

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 03/09/2025 at 12:16:37

¶15

quashing the Impugned Order dated 14 October 2024 (Annexure P – 1) passed by the Respondent No. 3 granting exclusive right to scrap the seized vehicles in the Keshav Puram Zone to Respondents No. 6 & No. 7 ;

¶16

c. Pass any order / direction / writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the Respondents No. 3 to Respondent No. 5 to hand over ELVs to all the empaneled scrappers and not give any preferential treatment to one particular scrapper in the respective MCD zone ;

¶17

xxx xxx xxx”

¶18

(Emphasis Supplied)

¶19

Perusal of the afore-noted prayer clauses shows that the petitioner is essentially seeking directions to the respondent nos. 1 and 2, i.e., Municipal Corporation and Delhi (“MCD”), and the Department of Transport, Government of NCT of Delhi, respectively, to establish and operationalize the “online portal” provided for in Clause 9 (ii) of the “Guidelines for handling end of life vehicles in public places of Delhi, 2024”, so that process of release & scrapping of vehicles is properly facilitated between the Enforcement Agencies, the Registered Vehicle Scrapping Facility and the Vehicle Owners.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing for the MCD has handed over to this Court an order dated 12^th August, 2025, passed by the Supreme Court in the case of “M.C. Mehta Versus Union of India and Ors. ”, W.P.(C) No. 13029/1985 , wherein, the following directions have been issued:

¶21

“ I.A. NO. 175079/2025 IN W.P. (C) NO.13029/1985:

¶22

1. Issue notice, returnable in four weeks.

¶23

2. In the meantime, we direct that no coercive steps be taken against the owners of the vehicles on the ground that they are 10 years old (in case of Diesel engine) and 15 years old (in case of Petrol engine) .”

¶24

(Emphasis Supplied)

¶25

The same is taken on record.

¶26

Reading of the aforesaid order clearly shows that the Supreme Court

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

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 03/09/2025 at 12:16:37

¶29

has directed, in categorical, terms that no coercive steps shall be taken against the owners of the vehicles, on the ground that they are ten years old in case of diesel engine, and fifteen years old in case of petrol engine.

¶30

Considering the aforesaid direction of the Supreme Court, it is evident that the vehicles cannot be seized by the requisite authorities on the basis that the said vehicles having attained the end of life.

¶31

Accordingly, no relief can be granted in the present writ petition.

¶32

However, it is directed that after passing of the final orders by the Supreme Court, in case, any grievance of the petitioner still remains, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application to revive the present writ petition.

¶33

Noting the aforesaid, the present writ petition, along with the pending application, is disposed of.

¶34

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶35

SEPTEMBER 1, 2025 ak

¶36

This is a digitally signed order.

¶37

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 03/09/2025 at 12:16:37

Pineview Technology Private Limited v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pineview Technology Private Limited v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yashraj Tiwari (Minor) Son of Shri Pravin Kumar Tiwari Vs Union of India & Anr.

Mrinali Anil Salian Vs Union of India & Ors.

Anr. International (P) Ltd. Vs Deputy Comissioner of Income Tax & Anr.

Shri Ram Sevak Vs M/S Easyday Shop (Future Retail Limited)

Durga Shiva Kumar & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Vutla Subbarao Vs the Commissioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Ors.

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Vs Madan Lal Paneri

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan Vs Ms.Radhika Joshi

Anjali & Anr. Vs University of Delhi & Anr.

Heminder Kumari Vs New Delhi Municipal Council

Smt Shanti Vs Municipal Corporation Ofdelhi & Ors.

Shahrukh Khan Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Reena Mehra Vs Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Pushpa Pandey Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.