Skip to content


Col M L Kaktikar (Retd.) and Anr vs.new Delhi Municipal Council and Ors - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided On
AppellantCol M L Kaktikar (Retd.) and Anr
RespondentNew Delhi Municipal Council and Ors
Excerpt:
.....the first time that the respondents no.2 and 3 have undertaken unauthorised construction in the subject premises. prior hereto, in the years 2009 and thereafter in the year 2014, the respondents no.2 and 3 had undertaken unauthorised construction in a part of the ground floor and the first and the wp(c) 10173/2016 page 1 of 3 second floors of the subject premises, and the respondent no.1/ndmc had issued them notices to show cause. thereafter, demolitions orders dated 11.12.2012 and 04.03.2016 were passed. aggrieved by the said demolition orders, the respondents no.2 and 3 had filed appeals before the appellate tribunal, ndmc, wherein interim orders have been passed in their favour. the said appeals are stated to be pending.3. learned counsel for the petitioner states that now in a.....
Judgment:

$~33. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10173/2016 and CM APPL.40211-40212/2016 COL M L KAKTIKAR (RETD.) AND ANR ........ Petitioner

s Through: Mr. Prosenjeet Banerjee, Advocate with Ms. Nidhi Parashar and Ms. Amrita Chandra, Adv. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ORS........ RESPONDENTS

Through: Mr. Anil Grover, Standing Counsel with Ms. Kanika Singh, ASC and Ms. Noopur Singhal, Advocate for R-1/NDMC. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI % ORDER

2610.2016 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners praying inter alia for issuing directions to the respondent No.1/NDMC to take appropriate action in respect of the alleged illegal construction/unauthorised structure raised by the respondents No.2 and 3 on the terrace above the second floor of premises No.25, Aradhana Enclave, R.K.Puram, New Delhi.

2. Mr. Banerjee, learned counsel for the petitioners states that this is not the first time that the respondents No.2 and 3 have undertaken unauthorised construction in the subject premises. Prior hereto, in the years 2009 and thereafter in the year 2014, the respondents No.2 and 3 had undertaken unauthorised construction in a part of the ground floor and the first and the WP(C) 10173/2016 Page 1 of 3 second floors of the subject premises, and the respondent No.1/NDMC had issued them notices to show cause. Thereafter, demolitions orders dated 11.12.2012 and 04.03.2016 were passed. Aggrieved by the said demolition orders, the respondents No.2 and 3 had filed appeals before the Appellate Tribunal, NDMC, wherein interim orders have been passed in their favour. The said appeals are stated to be pending.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that now in a blatant fashion, the respondents No.2 and 3 have proceeded to raise some fresh unauthorised construction on the roof above the second floor of the subject premises, which fact was duly brought to the notice of the respondent No.1/NDMC vide letter dated 25.06.2016, received on 27.06.2016 (Annexure P-8) but to no avail as till date, no steps have been taken by the civic authority to inspect the premises and stay the hands of the respondents No.2 and 3. Learned counsel also clarifies that the grievance raised in the present petition cannot be raised before the ATMCD for the reason that the unauthorized construction that has been undertaken on the terrace above the second floor, is not a subject matter of the two appeals pending before the Tribunal.

4. Mr. Grover, learned Standing Counsel, NDMC, who appears on advance notice, assures the Court that appropriate action, if necessary, shall be initiated by the respondent No.1/NDMC and officers of the Department shall inspect the premises in question within two weeks from today to verify the status of the construction allegedly undertaken on the terrace of the second floor of the premises.

5. In the event the fresh construction raised on the terrace above the second floor is found to be without any sanctioned building plans and the WP(C) 10173/2016 Page 2 of 3 same is not a subject matter of the two appeals, pending before the Tribunal, then necessary action shall be taken by the respondent No.1/NDMC to issue a notice to show cause in accordance with law, within two weeks thereafter. If on inspection, it transpires that the construction being undertaken on the terrace of the second floor of the subject premises requires a sanctioned building plan which has not been obtained, then immediate steps shall be taken to restrain any further construction.

6. The respondents No.2 and 3 shall be afforded an opportunity to file a reply to the notice to show cause and the said proceeding shall be taken to its logical conclusion by the respondent No.1/NDMC within three weeks from the date of granting a personal hearing to them. The decision taken by the respondent No.1/NDMC shall be communicated in writing to the respondents No.2 and 3 with a copy marked to the petitioners. If the parties are aggrieved by the decision taken by the respondent No.1/NDMC, they shall be entitled to seek their remedies in accordance with law.

7. The petition is disposed of alongwith the pending applications. DASTI to the respondent no.1/NDMC under the signatures of the Court Master. A copy of this order shall be forwarded by the respondent No.1/NDMC to the respondent No.2 and 3 for information. OCTOBER26 2016 rkb/sk HIMA KOHLI, J WP(C) 10173/2016 Page 3 of 3


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //