Disposed¶36

Nitin Ahuja v. Ndmc

Delhi HC11 Nov 2025W.P.(C)/8145/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sealing/de-sealing; sealing without show cause notice; NDMC; DSIIDC; MPD-2021; Para 15.9 (v); misuse penalty/misuse charges; DDA notification dated 29.06.2018; carpentry user; undertaking/affidavit to authority; premises at Dargah Sayed Hussain, Mandir Marg, New Delhi-110001. Bench: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Mini Pushkarna; decided 11.11.2025; petition along with CM APPL. 31282/2023 and CM APPL. 26081/2025 disposed of. Citable for de-sealing granted upon user-compliance undertakings; does NOT decide entitlement to misuse penalty charges (expressly left open).

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with direction that the petitioner's premises be de-sealed forthwith, subject to the petitioner complying with its undertaking to carry out only activities permissible under MPD-2021. ¶36

Nitin Ahuja Vs Ndmc — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the Sealing Order dated 04.02.2019 and the sealing of the petitioner's premises without prior Show Cause Notice should be quashed, and the premises de-sealed. +1 more

¶7

Court's answer

In view of the petitioner's undertaking filed with DSIIDC and NDMC, the Court found no impediment in ordering de-sealing of the premises.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's premises are directed to be de-sealed forthwith.

¶35

Key takeaways

The petitioner is enjoined to comply with its undertaking and ensure that only activities permissible as per MPD-2021 are carried out in the premises.ratio¶35
NDMC's contention that misuse penalty charges are leviable (Para 15.9(v) MPD 2021 read with DDA notification dated 29.06.2018) was disputed by the petitioner and was expressly held not to be before the Court, leaving the point open.obiter¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Mini Pushkarna, J.), W.P.(C) 8145/2023, order dated 11.11.2025: Writ petition challenging the Sealing Order dated 04.02.2019 and sealing of premises at Dargah Sayed Hussain, Mandir Marg, New Delhi, allegedly effected without prior Show Cause Notice, disposed of. Pursuant to orders dated 17.09.2025 and 15.10.2025, the petitioner had undertaken to use the premises only for MPD-2021-permitted activity ('Carpentry'/finished furniture products) and filed the requisite affidavit/undertaking with DSIIDC and NDMC; DSIIDC conveyed no objection to de-sealing. The Court directed de-sealing forthwith, enjoining compliance with the undertaking that only MPD-2021-permissible activities be carried out. NDMC's claim to misuse penalty charges under Para 15.9 (v) of MPD 2021 read with the DDA notification dated 29.06.2018 was noted but expressly held to be an issue not before the Court and left open.

¶1

$~21

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 8145/2023 & CM APPL. 31282/2023, CM APPL. 26081/2025

¶4

NITIN AHUJA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj, Ms. Nehmat Sethi and Mr. Adnan Nakash, Advs. Mob: 9569156376 Email: [email protected] versus NDMC .....Respondent Through: Mr. Vikas Chopra, SC for MCD with Mr. Neeraj Kumar and Ms Khushi, Advs. for MCD Mob: 9212036118 Email: [email protected] Mr. Tushar Sannu, ASC for NDMC with Mr. Parvin Bansal, Adv. Mob: 9911991136 Email: [email protected] Mr. Sonal Anand, Adv, for R2/DSIIDC

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

¶6

O R D E R % 11.11.2025

¶7

The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the Sealing Order dated 04th February, 2019 and sealing of the subject property on 04^th February, 2019, without prior Show Cause Notice. The petitioner

¶8

This is a digitally signed order.

¶9

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 13/11/2025 at 12:59:08

¶10

further seeks de-sealing of the premises in question, i.e., at Dargah Sayed Hussain, Mandir Marg, behind Gandhi Sadan Housing Complex, New Delhi-110001.

¶11

Vide order dated 17^th September, 2025, this Court had noted as follows:

¶12

“1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been using the premises only for the finishing products of the furniture, under the head ‘Carpentry’, which is allowed under the Master Plan of Delhi-2021 (“MPD 2021”). The petitioner undertakes that the petitioner shall not misuse the premises and shall use the premises only as per the user which is allowed under the MPD 2021 .

¶13

2. Learned counsel for the Delhi State Industrial & Infrastructure Development Corp. Ltd. (“DSIIDC”) submits that he has recently been engaged and seeks time to get instructions.

¶14

3. At request, re-notify on 15^th October, 2025, in Top Ten Matters in the Advance List.”

¶15

(Emphasis Supplied)

¶16

Perusal of the aforesaid order shows that it is the clear stand of the petitioner that the petitioner was using the premises only for the finished products of furniture under the head ‘Carpentry’, which is allowed under the Master Plan of Delhi, 2021 (“MPD 2021”). Further, this Court had noted the submissions of the petitioner that the petitioner shall not misuse the premises and shall use the premises only for the user, which is allowed under the MPD-2021.

¶17

Vide order dated 15^th October, 2025, this Court had noted the submissions made on behalf of the learned counsel for the Delhi State Industrial & Infrastructure Development Corporation (“DSIIDC”), in the following manner:

¶18

“1. Pursuant to the last order dated 17th September, 2025, learned counsel appearing for the Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure

¶19

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 13/11/2025 at 12:59:08

¶20

Development (“DSIIDC”) submits that the petitioner is required to give an affidavit and undertaking to the effect that the petitioner shall not carry out any non-conforming activities and that the petitioner shall not carry out any activity qua which an alternative plot already stands allotted to the petitioner.

¶21

2. In response, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he is ready to submit an undertaking with the DSIIDC in terms thereof and further, that the petitioner shall only carry out activities, which are permissible as per the Master Plan for Delhi, 2021 (“MPD-2021”) .

¶22

3. Accordingly, let the requisite affidavit/undertaking be filed by the petitioner before the DSIIDC as well as the New Delhi Municipal Council (“NDMC”), with advance copy to learned counsels for DSIIDC and NDMC, within a period of ten days, from today.

¶23

4. The Court shall pass appropriate orders on the next date of hearing.

¶24

5. Re-notify on 11^th November, 2025.”

¶25

(Emphasis Supplied)

¶26

Thus, as noted in the order dated 15th October, 2025, the petitioner had undertaken to submit undertaking with the New Delhi Municipal Council (“NDMC”) as well as DSIIDC, that the petitioner shall carry out activities, which are permissible as per the MPD 2021.

¶27

Today, this Court is informed that the requisite undertaking has already been submitted by the petitioner with the DSIIDC and NDMC. Copies of the said undertaking have also been placed on record.

¶28

Considering the aforesaid, there is no impediment in passing the order for de-sealing of the premises in question.

¶29

At this stage, learned counsel for the NDMC submits that the misuse charges shall be leviable upon the petitioner, in terms of the Para 15.9 (v) of MPD 2021 and Notification of the Delhi Development Authority (“DDA”) dated 29^th June, 2018.

¶30

¶31

Learned counsel for respondent-NDMC further submits that the NDMC is entitled for receipt of the misuse penalty charges.

¶32

However, the aforesaid submissions are disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner has never misused the property and has always carried out the activities in terms of MPD 2021. 11. He further submits that no such issue has been raised by the NDMC, either in their reply before this Court or in the Show Cause Notice issued to the petitioner or during the sealing proceedings.

¶33

Be that as it may, the aforesaid issue is not before this Court.

¶34

This Court takes note of the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondent-DSIIDC that in view of the undertaking/affidavit filed by the petitioner, DSIIDC has no objection to the de-sealing of the premises.

¶35

Considering the submissions made before this Court, it is directed that the premises of the petitioner, as noted above, shall be de-sealed forthwith. Further, the petitioner is enjoined upon to comply with its undertaking and ensure that only activities, which are permissible as per the MPD-2021, shall be carried out by the petitioner.

¶36

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

¶37

MINI PUSHKARNA, J

¶38

NOVEMBER 11, 2025/ au

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

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 13/11/2025 at 12:59:08

Nitin Ahuja v. Ndmc

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin Ahuja v. Ndmc

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Delicious Coco Water Private Ltd. Vs Small Industrial Development Bank of India & Anr.

Smt Seema and Ors. Vs Delhi Development Authority and Ors.

Neeru Malhotra Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Vikas Yadav and Ors. Vs Government of NCT Delhi and Anr.

Mystic Vs Delhi Pollution Control Committee & Anr.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Karuna Shankar Dubey and Ors.

Shri Daulat Ram Lamba Vs the Union of India & Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Sgt Abhishek Kumar (Retd.)

Vijay Pal Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Chinot Basti Prem Nagar Welfare Association (Regd) & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Sukanya Tiwari Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Residents Welfare Association and Anr. Vs East Delhi Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Shariq Ameer Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Deepak Vats Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.