Disposed¶22

Babita Vaswani v. Muncipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Delhi HC30 Apr 2026W.P.(C)/5960/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court writ petition W.P.(C) 5960/2026 (CM APPL. 29225/2026 & CM APPL. 29226/2026), Babita Vaswani versus Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and Others, decided 30.04.2026 by Justice Amit Bansal. Subject matter: MCD/DJB permission for sewer connection to main sewer line and road cutting upon payment of requisite charges; alleged hindrance by neighbours to road cutting; petitioner permitted to seek assistance of SHO, P.S. Amar Colony (respondent no.3); petition and pending CM applications disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner left at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, including approaching respondent no.3 (SHO, P.S. Amar Colony) for the road cutting exercise in terms of the permission granted; the writ petition and the pending applications stand disposed of. ¶22

Babita Vaswani Vs Muncipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, having been granted permission by respondent no.1/MCD and respondent no.2/DJB to connect the sewer from his property to the main sewer line and to carry out road cutting (upon payment of requisite charges, which the petitioner states were paid), could proceed with the road cutting exercise notwithstanding hindrances allegedly created by neighbours in the area.

¶20

Court's answer

In the circumstances (permissions granted by MCD and DJB upon payment of requisite charges, payment made, but neighbours creating hindrances), the petitioner is at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, including approaching the concerned police station, i.e., respondent no.3/SHO, P.S. Amar Colony, for carrying out the road cutting exercise in terms of the permission granted.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court, W.P.(C) 5960/2026 (with CM APPL. 29225/2026 & CM APPL. 29226/2026), Babita Vaswani versus Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others; order dated 30.04.2026 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal. Petition concerned connection of the petitioner's sewer to the main sewer line and related road cutting. Counsel for respondent no.1/MCD and respondent no.2/DJB submitted that permission for the sewer connection and for road cutting had been granted upon payment of requisite charges; petitioner's counsel submitted the charges were paid but that neighbours in the area were creating hindrances to the road cutting exercise. The court held the petitioner at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, including approaching the concerned police station (respondent no.3/SHO, P.S. Amar Colony) for carrying out the road cutting in terms of the permission granted. The writ petition and the pending applications stood disposed of.

¶1

$~49

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 5960/2026, CM APPL. 29225/2026 & CM APPL. 29226/2026

¶4

BABITA VASWANI .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Manish Raghav, Mr. Prakash Srivastava, Ms. Smriti Dubey and Mr. Rajan Thakur, Advocates.

¶6

versus MUNCIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ORS .....Respondents

¶7

Through: Mr. Akash Chatterjee, Advocate for MCD.

¶8

Mr. Tushar Sannu, Mr. Vaibhav Tripathi and Ms. Payal Rajput, Advocates for DJB.

¶9

Mr. Rajesh Kumar and Mr. Siddharth Shekhar, Advocates for R-3.

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

¶12

¶13

O R D E R 30.04.2026

¶14

The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

¶15

W.P.(C) 5960/2026

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

This is a digitally signed order.

¶18

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 04/05/2026 at 12:45:05

¶19

Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.1/MCD and respondent no.2/ DJB submit that they have granted permission to the petitioner to connect the sewer from his property to the main sewer line and MCD has also given permission for road cutting for this purpose, upon the petitioner paying the requisite charges.

¶20

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the he has paid the requisite charges. He further submits that neighbours in the area are creating hindrances for the petitioner to carry out the road cutting exercise.

¶21

In these circumstances, the petitioner would be at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law, including approaching the concerned police station i.e., respondent no.3/ SHO, P.S. Amar Colony for carrying out the road cutting exercise in terms of the permission granted.

¶22

The writ petition stands disposed of.

¶23

The pending applications also stand disposed of.

AMIT BANSAL, J

APRIL 30, 2026

Vivek/-

W.P.(C) 5960/2026

Page 2 of 2

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 04/05/2026 at 12:45:05

Babita Vaswani v. Muncipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babita Vaswani v. Muncipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Satya Vati and Anr. Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation and Ors.

Daniel Alexander Foley Vs Union of India

Santosh Kumar Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Khalda Rehman Vs Sub Registrar Central District & Anr.

IC-74753F Lt Col Manali Shrivastava Vs Union of India and Ors.

K.Vijay Kumar & 2 Others Vs Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.

Dr. N.Emayavaramban Vs UOI & Ors.

Deepak Kumar & Ors. Vs Border Security Force & Anr.

Bhanwar Singh Rajawat Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Banarasi Dass Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi (Mcd) & Ors.

Sunil Tyagi & Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi, through the Deputy Commissioner (South) & Ors.

Arvind Kumar Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Anand Moudgil Authorized Signatory Sole Proprietorship Firm Hermes Anand Vs Secretary Cum Commissioner Transport Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Robin Dagar Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.