Disposed¶14

Satya Prakash Sharma v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Delhi HC2 May 2025CONT.CAS(C)/1317/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court; CONT.CAS(C) 1317/2024; Satya Prakash Sharma (Petitioner) v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi (Respondent); order dated 02.05.2025 by Justice Anish Dayal; contempt/compliance case re demolition under order dated 18.12.2023 in W.P.(C) 16272/2024; demolition programme fixed 07.05.2025; police support through SHO, Khajuri Khas; petition disposed with liberty to revive upon continued infraction; strictures and costs threatened on MCD; compliance report in four weeks; status report in three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of on the respondent counsel's undertaking, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to revive the petition in case of any continued infraction by the MCD; MCD directed to complete any further demolition within four weeks and to file compliance and status reports. ¶14

Satya Prakash Sharma Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi — Contempt of Court | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the Municipal Corporation of Delhi would complete the pending demolition pursuant to the Court's order dated 18 December 2023 in W.P.(C) 16272/2024 and file a compliance report before the Court. +2 more

¶11

Court's answer

The Court took on record the submission, on instructions, of MCD's Additional Standing Counsel that the demolition programme was fixed for 07 May 2025, in compliance of the Court's order dated 18 December 2023 in W.P.(C) 16272/2024.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

The Court directed that any further demolition process required to be undertaken shall be completed within the next four weeks, and that a compliance report shall be filed before the Court with copy to counsel for the petitioner.

¶11

Key takeaways

In view of the huge resistance earlier offered by the property owner during the demolition process, the Court directed the SHO, Khajuri Khas to provide full police support to the MCD team so that the Court's orders are complied with.ratio¶12
On the respondent counsel's undertaking, the Court disposed of the petition, with liberty reserved to the petitioner to revive the same in case of any continued infraction.ratio¶14
The Court expressly cautioned that any continued infractions by the MCD will invite strictures and imposition of costs by the Court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt petition (CONT.CAS(C) 1317/2024, Satya Prakash Sharma v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi) concerning execution of the demolition forming the subject of the Court's order dated 18 December 2023 in W.P.(C) 16272/2024. Pursuant to a previous order, MCD, through its Additional Standing Counsel, submitted on instructions that the demolition programme was fixed for 07 May 2025 in compliance of the said order. Justice Anish Dayal directed that any further demolition be completed within the next four weeks with a compliance report to the Court; noting the huge resistance earlier put up by the property owner, directed the SHO, Khajuri Khas to provide full police support to the MCD team; disposed of the petition on the respondent's undertaking with liberty to the petitioner to revive it upon any continued infraction; cautioned that continued infractions would invite strictures and imposition of costs on the MCD; and ordered a status report within three weeks with copies to counsel for the petitioner.

¶1

$~4

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CONT.CAS(C) 1317/2024

¶4

SATYA PRAKASH SHARMA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Vishal Khanna, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ashutosh Gupta, ASC for MCD.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

¶9

O R D E R % 02.05.2025

¶10

Pursuant to previous order, Mr Ashutosh Gupta, Additional Standing counsel for MCD, appears and submits on instructions that demolition programme is fixed for 07^th May 2025, in compliance of order dated 18^th December 2023 in W.P. (C) 16272/2024 .

¶11

If there is any further demolition process which is required to be undertaken, it shall be undertaken within the next four weeks and a compliance report shall be filed before this Court, with copy to counsel for petitioner.

¶12

It is also submitted by the MCD that there was a huge resistance from the property owner, when the process of demolition was undertaken, earlier. 4. Accordingly, SHO, Khajuri Khas is directed to provide full police support to the MCD team, in order that orders of this Court, are complied with.

¶13

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 01/07/2025 at 01:35:35

¶14

On the aforesaid undertaking of counsel for the respondent, petition is disposed of, with liberty to petitioner to revive the same, in case of any continued infraction.

¶15

It is made clear that any continued infractions, will invite strictures and imposition of costs by this Court, on the MCD.

¶16

Status report will be filed within the next three weeks with copies to counsel for petitioner.

¶17

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶18

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶19

MAY 2, 2025/RK/ kp

¶20

Satya Prakash Sharma v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Prakash Sharma 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

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prime Export Corporation Vs Sh. a. Anbarasu, Principal Commissioner of GST and Anr.

Ashok Kumar Nair Vs Sumit Singh

Vijender Kumar Goel & Anr. Vs Jai Kumar Goel & Ors.

Shashi Sabharwal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Kashmir Paswan Vs Shobha Devi

Ashok Maheswari Vs Commissioner Sdmc

No 09SF1529132 Const Pardeep Kumar & Ors. Vs T v Somanathan, IAS and Anr.

Mukesh Singh Vs Sachin Shinde

Prime Export Corporation Vs Sh. a. Anbarasu, Principal Commissioner of GST and Anr.

Ashok Kumar Nair Vs Sumit Singh

Vijender Kumar Goel & Anr. Vs Jai Kumar Goel & Ors.

Vishwanath Vs Shri Gyanesh Bharti & Anr.

Sai Saraswati Institute for Teacher Education Vs Sh. Pankaj Arora & Ors.

Glaxo Group Limited Vs Biogen Serums Private Limited and Ors.