"MCD Professes To Be Either Helpless Or Unwilling To Take Action": Delhi HC Issue Directions To Tackle Unauthorised Constructions
The Delhi High Court has observed that when an authority like the Municipal Corporation of Delhi ('MCD') professes to be either helpless or unable to take action, the same lends credence to the apprehensions of a person regarding the connivance of the MCD officials with the concerned owner/occupier/builder of the property in question.
The Court also gave directions to the MCD, given the erosion of confidence in the MCD’s intent and ability to tackle the unauthorized construction.
The Bench of Justice Sachin Datta observed, “This Court is unable to countenance a situation where the MCD is not even in a position to identify the relevant khasra number/s of the land in question where rampant unauthorized construction is being raised. When an authority like the MCD professes to be either helpless or unable/unwilling to take action, the same lends credence to the allegations/ apprehensions of the petitioner regarding connivance of the MCD officials with the concerned owner/occupier/builder of the property in question. There is no justification whatsoever as regards the evident lack of ability/desire on the part of the MCD to take requisite action against the rampant unauthorized construction in the present case. It is incumbent on the MCD to ensure that any action qua the unauthorized construction in question is not impeded on any account, including any alleged difficulty in obtaining particulars of the khasra number/s of the land in question and/ or in identifying the owner/occupier/builder of the property in question.”
Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi appeared for the Petitioner while Senior Advocates Sanjeev Sindhwani, Akshay Makhija, ASC Mohd. Irshad and ASC Satyakam appeared for the Respondents.
A petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking directions to the respondents-authorities to take appropriate action with regard to the illegal construction on land described in the petition as Grand Westend, Rajokri, New Delhi. The land in question, on which unauthorized construction is stated to be subsisting, admeasuring approximately 7.5 acres and includes various khasra numbers. A site plan of the land/premises has been annexed along with the petition. The petitioner stated to have made various representations to the MCD with regard to the subsisting and ongoing unauthorized construction, but in vain. A demolition order was also stated to have been passed in respect of the unauthorized construction.
The Court was confronted with the following situations: i. Large-scale unauthorized construction has taken place as per the MCD itself; ii. The unauthorized construction continued unabated despite the demolition order passed by the MCD and despite the work-stop notice issued by the MCD; iii. There are serious allegations that MCD has acted in collusion with the offending persons who have raised unauthorized construction and that there has been a serious lack of diligence on the part of the MCD.
In the affidavit filed on behalf of the concerned police officer, it was brought to the Court’s notice that despite the demolition order having been passed and work-stop letters having been issued by the MCD with regard to the property in question, unauthorized construction continued unabated.
The Court said, “The brazen conduct on the part of the owner/occupier of the property in continuing with unauthorized construction despite a demolition order and a work-stop notice, merited serious action on the part of the authorities. Unfortunately, the concerned authorities have been remiss in this regard… The present case serves as an unsavory example of a situation where the Municipal Authorities had been found wanting at various levels to deal with the unscrupulous manner in which the unauthorized construction in question has been raised.”
The Court gave the following directions to the MCD: (i) The MCD shall identify the land on which the unauthorized construction in question has/is being raised and the concerned owner/occupier/builder; (ii) The MCD shall duly inspect the unauthorized construction in question to ascertain the extent thereof. The MCD shall also inspect the neighbouring/ other properties in the locality to ascertain whether unauthorized construction has proliferated in the area. Requisite action, in accordance with the law, shall be taken qua every unauthorized construction; it shall be ensured that effective action is not impeded on account of any confusion as regards the khasra number/s on which any unauthorized construction subsists.
Further, (iii) Immediate and effective steps shall be taken by the MCD as also the Police Authorities/SHO of PS Vasant Kunj to ensure that no further unauthorized construction is allowed to be raised in the area in question and that any ongoing unauthorized construction is put to an immediate halt. Strict disciplinary action is directed to be taken against the concerned officials of the MCD/Police officials if they are remiss in implementing these directions. (iv) The ATMCD is requested to decide the pending appeals qua the unauthorized construction in question as expeditiously as possible.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the petition.
Cause Title: Smriti Bhatia v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:5947)
Appearances:
Petitioner: Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi, Advocates Parul Tuli, Shaunak Kashyap, Nistha Gupta, Ahmar Shad, Sumer Dev Seth and Anu Panwar.
Respondents: Senior Advocates Sanjeev Sindhwani, Akshay Makhija, ASC Mohd. Irshad, ASC Satyakam, Advocates Ajjay Aroraa, Kapil Dutta, Vansh Luthra, Simran Arora, Nasreen, Kunal Raj, Shailesh Chauhan, Pradyut Kashyap, Balendu Shekhar, Raj Kumar Maurya, Krishna Chaitanya, Virender Mehta, Aseem Chaturvedi, Kunal Mehta, Milind Jain and Kanika Agnihotri.
