SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Del) 1245

High Court Of Delhi
S. MURALIDHAR
PATRI ASSOCIATION REGD - Appellant
Versus
MUNICPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI - Respondents
W. P. (C) 4499 Of 2000
Decided On : 06/11/2007

Advocates Appeared:
GAURAV SHARMA, KIRTIMAN SINGH, MANINDER SINGH, SANGEETA CHANDRA, Tanubhan Singh, Vibhu Shankar

Headnote:Commercial — Squatters — Earlier writ petition filed by regular shopkeepers of IN a market for removal of illegal squatters from market — MCD filed affidavit stating there were 51 authorised squatters who were allotted tehbazari sites since 1979 — Allegations and counter allegation made by shopkeepers and authorized squatters — Directions were issued to remove illegal construction by shopkeepers, removal of unauthorized squatters and authorized squatters not to encroach any area beyond what was permissible — Present petitions filed restraining MCD from removing tehbazari holders and for removal of encroachments by unauthorised squatters — MCD now stated that petitioners were given only temporary tehbazari on daily basis which is revocable at any time and does not confer any permanent right — During hearing of applications MCD sought time to verify whether petitioners were the same 52 persons who were accepted as licensed squatters since 1979 — Affidavit to this effect filed by MCD — Held, in first affidavit it was categorically stated that petitioners were authorized squatters of 1979, were issued tehbazari receipts since 1979 — Verification of affidavit stated that it was true to records of case — No review filed by MCD against said order that affidavit contained mistaken facts nor any appeal filed — MCD admitted having no record — List of authorized squatters now produced does not include squatter of 1979 — Pre-1979 allotment letters do not pertain to this area — Principles of res judicata do get attracted and would prevent the MCD from taking changed stand and thereby attempt to reopen settled issue — Petitioners squatting in Mohan Singh Market, Opposite to IN a since 1979 — MCD unable to show anything to contrary — Names appear in list of 51 persons — Petitioners not required to apply under any scheme as they were already authorized squatters of 1979 — Order passed pursuant of affidavit of MCD — Directions issued to MCD — Petition allowed.

       Once the proceedings have attained finality, parties are bound by the judgment and are stopped from questioning it and from litigating the same question over again even though the judicial determination may be demonstratedly wrong.


S. MURALIDHAR, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner, the Patri Association is an association of traders stated to be squatting at 6x4 feet tehbazari sites opposite Mohan Singh Market, ina since 1979. It has filed these two writ petitions seeking to restrain the municipal Corporation of Delhi ('mcd') from removing its members from their respective tehbazari sites which, according to them, they are in lawful possession of and for removal of encroachments by unauthorised squatters.

( 2 ) THE background to the filing of these petitions is that the Mohan Singh market Association, INA Market, New Delhi had earlier filed W. P. (C) No. 2052 of 1996 in this Court. The members of that Association were the regular shopkeepers. They sought a direction for removal of illegal squatters from the market. In the said writ petition, a counter affidavit dated 15. 5. 1997 was filed on behalf of the MCD by Shri Jagdish Chandra (AO) stating that there were 51 authorised squatters who were allotted tehbazari sites of 6x4 feet since 1979. Enclosed to the affidavit was a list of 51 such tehbazari holders. The relevant portions of the said affidavit read as under:

"1]. For that the premises in question, forming part of the subject matter of the instant writ petition has been given on tehbazari basis to the respective tehbazari holders by the Municipal Corporation of Delh. That the site in question was allotted to the eligible squatters in the year, 1979 as per the resolutions passed by the M. C. D. to settle the Rehri/patri/khomcha walas. It is stated that that since 1979 till date the said squatters are continuously squatting at the site in question and as and when any encroachment beyond an area of 6'x4' is found, the same is removed immediately by the MCD U/s. 320/321 of the DMC Act, 1957. In this context, it is relevant to state that the Municipal Corporation of Delhi with the help of Local Police have removed all the unauthorised squatters/encroachments beyond the allotted area of 6'x4' on 28. 10. 1996 and 17. 4. 1997 and at present only the eligible squatters are squatting at their allotted sites 6'x4' open to sky. However, the MCD has been taking action from time to time against the encroachments. The allegations thus levelled against the MCD officials in qua connivance are baseless, frivolous and incorrect.

2]. The said space was allotted to the eligible squatters in the year 1979 to the extent of 6" x 4", details whereof is also appended herewith. " the MCD has no other record available with it, except the Tehbazari receipts that have been issued since 1979 onwards to these tehbazari holders.

3]. For that it is further relevant to place on the record of this Hon'ble court the orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 01. 05. 1997 in the case of gainda Ram v. NDMC and other connected IA's. It is stated that in the case of gainda Ram v. MCD the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India had decided the matter of the squatters who were squatting since 1972 to 1982 and 1982 to 8. 7. 1991. The squatters who come under the first category have already been allotted tehbazari measuring 6'x4' open to sky opposite Mohan Singh Market INA in the year 1979. For the second category applications were sought with the proof of their continuous squatting at the site and accordingly they were also allotted the tehbazari sites at squatting zones approved by the Zonal Tehbazari Committee as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide directions that all the suits/writ petitions/appeals pending in the High Court, District Courts stood disposed of in terms of the said Orders and that no further suit/writ petition would be entertained by any Court. It was directed that the aggrieved persons could file applications in the Supreme Court of India itself as interlocutory applications in writ petition No. 1699/1987 Gainda Ram and Ors. v. MCD and Ors for appropriate orders and the judicial officers of the Bank of additional District and Sessions Judge was appointed to look into th




















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top