Hardeep Singh Safri Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

¶1

$~79

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CM(M) 1581/2026, CM APPL. 46700/2026 & CM APPL. 46701/2026

¶4

HARDEEP SINGH SAFRI .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Kundan Kumar Mishra and Mr. Ratnesh Kumar, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Kapil Dutta, Standing Counsel for MCD Ms. Mrinalini Sen, Standing Counsel with Mr. Pranay Lakhanpal, Adv. for DDA

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

% 23.07.2026

¶12

CM APPL. 46699/2026 (Exemption)

¶13

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.

¶15

CM(M) 1581/2026, CM APPL. 46700/2026 & CM APPL. 46701/2026

¶16

The present petition under Article 227(2) of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking directions to the learned Appellate Tribunal, MCD in respect to Appeal No. 822/2023 (with connected appeals no. 815/2023 and 821/2023) for time bound adjudication, for a reasoned reconsideration of the interim stay dated 22.12.2023 and for urgent protective measures including sealing of the subject premises.

¶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 25/07/2026 at 11:26:27

¶19

The petitioner is the recorded perpetual lessee of property of No. 76 MM. Road/ Rani Jhansi Road, New Delhi, which vide the order dated 24.04.2026 passed by the Delhi Development Authority has been cancelled on account of illegal and unauthorized occupancy and misuse of the premises. The same is under challenge before a coordinate bench of this Court and a stay has been granted in the same vide order dated 07.07.2026.

¶20

The brief and necessary facts for the disposal of this case are that aggrieved by the unauthorized constructions of respondents no. 2-6 herein, the petitioner approached this Court vide WP(C) No. 12479/2018, which was withdrawn with liberty to approach respondent no. 1, MCD herein. Subsequent to the representations, the MCD on 17.08.2023 directed removal of all illegal existing construction, and on 14.12.2023 issued a Notice of Vacation.

¶21

Aggrieved, respondents 2-6 preferred an appeal before the learned Appellate Tribunal MCD bearing Appeal Nos. 815/2023, 821/2023 and 822/2023, wherein the learned Appellate Tribunal on 22.12.2023 stayed the execution of the order dated 17.08.2023. It is the specific grievance of the petitioner that the order is still subsisting since the past 2 years.

¶22

The petitioner filed an application seeking impleadment as a party respondent before the learned appellate tribunal, wherein, the petitioner, on 18.04.2024, was considered to be a proper yet not a necessary party, and he was thus added as an intervenor. The petitioner has preferred a review petition against the order dated 18.04.2024, which is still pending adjudication.

¶23

Thereafter, the petitioner and respondent no. 1 have preferred numerous applications dated 19.07.2024 and 17.04.2025 seeking to bring on

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 25/07/2026 at 11:26:27

¶26

record additional documents, challenge the maintainability of the appeal by the respondents 2-6 and seek an audit of the building structure. The appeals are still pending adjudication. The petitioner then preferred numerous applications seeking early hearing, all of which came to be dismissed. The petitioner has thus invoked this Court’s supervisory jurisdiction seeking requisite directions to the learned Appellate Tribunal.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of the arguments has restricted his prayer to seeking early hearing and disposal of the matter by the learned Appellate Tribunal. He has submitted that the respondents 2-6 who have constructed the unauthorized constructions are, due to the stay order dated 22.12.2023, enjoying the property, and due to such unauthorized constructions, the petitioner’s perpetual lease deed had been cancelled by DDA through no fault of his own.

¶28

He further submits that the he has made every attempt to get the matter listed before the learned Appellate Tribunal and has filed three early hearing applications, all of which came to be erroneously dismissed by the learned Appellate Tribunal, despite the proof of unauthorized construction.

¶29

Heard. Perused the record.

¶30

This Court is of the view that numerous applications such as the petitioner’s review application against the order adding him as an intervenor, application seeking audit of the building and respondent no. 1’s own application challenging the maintainability of the appeal is pending, and the case has been stagnant since the past 2 years, and is at a nascent stage.

¶31

Accordingly, this Court is of the view that a direction can be issued to the Appellate Tribunal, MCD for early disposal in a time bound manner.

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 25/07/2026 at 11:26:27

¶34

It has been informed that the date fixed before the Appellate Tribunal, MCD is 14.10.2026.

¶35

This Court deems it appropriate to issue directions to the Appellate Tribunal, MCD that the matter may be disposed of on the date already fixed i.e. 14.10.2026 and in case if the matter is not heard on the date fixed, then it may be decided within a period of three months.

¶36

The present petition, along with pending application(s), if any, is disposed of.

¶37

AJAY DIGPAUL, J

¶38

JULY 23, 2026 /ar / sg

¶39

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 25/07/2026 at 11:26:27

Hardeep Singh Safri v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hardeep Singh Safri 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Ace Integrated Solutions Ltd. Vs Food Corporation of India

Munir Ahmed Vs Anil Bansal

Dolly Solanki Vs Dharamveer Singh

Abhimanyu Khanna Vs M/S Shri Hari Industries

Charoo Talwar Vs Nagesh Ghai & Anr.

Dlf Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd. Vs Surinder Pal Singh & Ors.

Manoj Kumar Jain Vs Hardik Garg

Nidhi Tanwar Vs Manik Vohra

M/S Ace Integrated Solutions Ltd. Vs Food Corporation of India

Munir Ahmed Vs Anil Bansal

Abhimanyu Khanna Vs M/S Shri Hari Industries

State Bank of India Vs Vishwanath Singh & Ors.

Hamid Khan Vs Mehmood Shah and Anr.

Sh. Naveen Kathuria, Vs State and Ors.