Disposed¶21

Husna & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC22 May 2026W.P.(C)/5399/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court; W.P.(C) 5399/2026 with CM APPL. 26377/2026; Husna & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.; Amit Bansal, J.; decided 22.05.2026; removal of unauthorised encroachment; khokha; temporary structure; G.B. Road; Shanhdhanand Marg; Ward No. VII; plot no.46; MCD status report; encroachment removed; letter dated 14.05.2026; SHO P.S. Kamla Market; strict vigil; prevention of recurrence; writ petition disposed of; liberty to pursue remedies; rights of private respondent no.3 kept open; pending application closed.

What did the court decide?

Directions to respondent no.1/MCD and respondent no.2/SHO, P.S. Kamla Market to ensure the encroachment does not recur; petitioner left at liberty to take appropriate remedies in law for any further grievance; pending application (CM APPL. 26377/2026) stands closed. ¶21

Husna & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct respondent no.1/MCD to remove the illegal and unauthorised encroachment (temporary structure/khokha) outside the petitioners' shop at the subject property.

¶11

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of with directions to respondent no.1/MCD and respondent no.2/SHO, P.S. Kamla Market to ensure that the encroachment does not recur again.

¶21

Key takeaways

If the petitioner has any further grievance with regard to unauthorised encroachment, he is at liberty to take appropriate remedies in law.obiter¶22
All rights, contentions and legal remedies of the private respondent no.3 are kept open.obiter¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P.(C) 5399/2026, Husna & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors. (Delhi High Court, Amit Bansal, J., 22.05.2026): Petitioners sought a direction to MCD to remove an illegal and unauthorised encroachment in the shape of a temporary structure/khokha outside their ground-floor shop at plot no.46, Ward No. VII, Shanhdhanand Marg, G.B. Road, Delhi-110006 ('subject property'), photographs of which accompanied the petition. MCD's status report recorded that the temporary encroachment had been removed (photographs of the action filed) and annexed a letter dated 14th May, 2026 to the SHO, P.S. Kamla Market asking the Police to keep strict vigil so the encroachment does not recur. Disposing of the petition, the Court directed MCD and the SHO, P.S. Kamla Market to ensure the encroachment does not recur again, left the petitioner free to pursue appropriate legal remedies for any further grievance, kept open all rights, contentions and remedies of the private respondent no.3, and closed the pending application.

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 5399/2026 with CM APPL. 26377/2026

¶4

HUSNA & ANR. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Ms. Aditi Aggarwal, Advocate.

¶6

versus

¶7

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents

¶8

Through: Dr. Geetanjali Sharma, CGSC with SI Ravinder for R-2 (through VC). Mr. Syed Hasan Isfahani, Advocate for R-3. Mr. Parminder Singh with Mr. Aryanshu Vaibhav Gautam, Advocates for R-1/MCD.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

¶10

O R D E R % 22.05.2026

¶11

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent no.1/ MCD to remove the illegal and unauthorised encroachment in the shape of temporary structure/ khokha outside the petitioners’ shop located at the ground floor at plot no.46, Ward No. VII, Shanhdhanand Marg, G.B. Road, Delhi-110006 ('subject property').

¶12

The photographs have been filed along with the writ petition showing the said unauthorised encroachment.

¶13

A status report has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.1/ MCD wherein it is stated that temporary encroachment in front of the subject

¶14

W.P.(C) 5399/2026

¶15

Page 1 of 2

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

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 26/05/2026 at 13:17:00

¶18

property has been removed.

¶19

3.1. Photographs of the action taken have been filed with the status report.

¶20

Along with the status report, a letter dated 14^th May, 2026 written by the MCD to the respondent no.2/ SHO, P.S. Kamla Market has also been annexed in terms of which the Police authorities have been asked to keep strict vigil at the subject property so that the encroachment does not recur again.

¶21

In view the aforesaid status report, the present writ petition is disposed of while directing the respondent no.1/ MCD as well as the respondent no.2/ SHO, P.S. Kamla Market to ensure that the encroachment does not recur again.

¶22

In the event, the petitioner has any further grievance with regard to unauthorised encroachment, he is at liberty to take appropriate remedies in law.

¶23

All rights, contentions and legal remedies of the private respondent no.3 are kept open.

¶24

Pending application stands closed.

AMIT BANSAL, J

MAY 22, 2026

Rzu

W.P.(C) 5399/2026

Page 2 of 2

This is a digitally signed order.

¶31

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 26/05/2026 at 13:17:00

Husna & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Husna & Anr. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

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

Islamuddin Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi through Chief Secretary & Ors.

Ashwani Kumar Pandey Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ashrit Talwar Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Smt Sheela Vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Bhuthalingam Hariharan Vs Bureau of Immigration

Molvi Anzar Vs National Testing Agency & Ors.

Ms. Aarti Mathur & Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Smt. Shiksha Jain Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Islamuddin Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi through Chief Secretary & Ors.

Ashrit Talwar Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Shri Ajay Kumar Gupta Sole Proprietor of M/S Surindfr and Co. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Anr.

Shamsheer Ali Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Pace Digitek Limited Vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited & Anr.

Dr Bhagwat Dayal Vashisht Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.