Back
2017 Supreme(Del) 1307
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MANMOHAN, J.
NISHA SHARMA – Petitioner
Versus
ANIL KUMAR GUPTA & OTHERS – Respondents
C.M. Nos. 24344, 24555, 27102, 27384-27385 of 2016 & 13840 of 2017 in CONT. CAS (C) No. 690 of 2010 & 838 of 2016 in W.P. (C) No. 2095 of 2016
Decided On : 01-05-2017
For the Petitioners: Mr. Deepak Anand with Ms. Hemlata Rawat.
For the Respondents: Mr. D.K. Rustagi with Mr. Apoorv Rastogi, Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, Mr. Sunil Chaudhary, Mr. Gurumukh Singh and Mr. Anurag Kumar.
The court emphasized the importance of public interest and the precautionary principle in matters of fire safety compliance.
Headnote:
Fire Safety - Buildings - W.P. (C) Nos. 5638-5645/2005, LPA No. 387/2016, Cont. Cas (C) No. 690/2010, W.P. (C) No. 2095/2016 - The court discussed the compliance with fire safety measures, including the construction of a 50,000 litres water tank, and the failure to obtain a NOC/Fire Safety Certificate. The court emphasized the importance of public interest and the precautionary principle in such matters, directing the sealing of the buildings and disconnection of electricity until fire compliance is achieved.
Fact of the Case:
The issue revolved around the compliance with fire safety measures, particularly the construction of a 50,000 litres water tank, in buildings occupied by Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta & Others, with pending civil suits between the owner and the occupants.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the underground water storage tank was not operational, and after nearly twelve years of non-compliance, it ordered the sealing of the buildings and disconnection of electricity until fire compliance is achieved.
Issues: The main issue was the non-compliance with fire safety measures, specifically the construction of the water tank, and the failure to obtain a NOC/Fire Safety Certificate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of public interest and the precautionary principle, holding that inter se disputes between occupants and the owner cannot hold public interest to ransom.
Final Decision: The court directed the sealing of the buildings and disconnection of electricity until fire compliance is achieved, allowing either party to file for recall/modification/variation of the order upon compliance.
MANMOHAN, J.
1. In the present batch of matters, the issue that arises for consideration is whether the buildings in question i.e. 470, 471 and 472, Chandani Chowk, Delhi-110 006 are fire safe or not. It is pertinent to mention that Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta & Others, are occupants in a property whose owner is Ms. Nisha Sharma. Admittedly, there are inter se disputes including civil suits pending between the owner and the occupants.
2. On 06th April, 2005 in W.P. (C) Nos. 5638-5645/2005, a Division Bench of this Court had recorded the undertaking of the occupants, Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta & Others, that within a period of three months, they shall incorporate fire safety measures in accordance with law, failing which, the protection granted by the Court shall stand automatically vacated. Till that time, the supply of electricity was not to be disconnected.
3. In contempt petitions as well as in the writ petition, both sides are blaming each other for delay in incorporating fire safety measures, in particular, the construction of 50,000 litres water tank.
4. As late as 24th March, 2017, another Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 387/2016 clarified that the water tank shall be constructed under the supervision of Dr. Maqsood E. Nazar in view of the consensual order that was passed in Cont. Cas (C) No. 690/2010.
5. Today Mr. D.K. Rustagi, learned counsel for Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta & Others, states that his clients are in the process of seeking a clarification from the Division Bench as to how the order dated 24th March, 2017 can be complied with as on the date the said order was passed, the water tank had already been constructed.
6. It is pertinent to mention that C.M. No. 24334/2016 had been filed in W.P. (C) No. 2095/2016 by Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta seeking extension of only thirty days from 28th June, 2016 to comply with the order dated 30th March, 2016, by virtue of which the applicants- occupants had been directed to make 50,000 litres underground water tank operational.
7. Today, learned counsel for Delhi Fire Service has handed over a status report dated 24th April, 2017. The said report reads as under:-
“1. In pursuant to the order dated 23.02.2017 of the High Court of Delhi in W.P. (C) 2095/2016, Smt. Nisha Sharma vide letter dated 23.03.2017, Sarvshri Ramesh Kumar Yadav, Anil Kumar Gupta, Hari Om Aggarwal, Shiv Parkash Aggarwal and Smt. Sunita Aggarwal vide letter dated 17.03.2017 submitted a formal request to this department for issue of NOC. The application was not in the time directed by the Hon’ble Court in its order dated 23.02.2017. However application was duly processed and the premises was inspected by the team of officers concerned of this department on 08.03.2017 and 06.04.2017. Ground floors shops and under ground water storage tank was inspected but inspection for upper floors was denied by Mr. R.D. Sharma on behalf of Smt. Nisha Sharma (landlord). However report is as under.
2. The under ground water storage tank has been constructed under two shops but the details of the tank such as capacity, dimensions, operational condition, structural stability certificate was not provided. In addition to this fire pump, draw off connection, proper manhole with cover, water replenishment arrangement are not yet made. The tank was lying empty.
3. The affidavit dated 10.08.2016 filed by the petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 2095/2016 reveals that the capacity of the water storage tank is only 47,100 ltrs as against 50,000 ltrs.
4. The department is neither competent nor qualified for ascertaining the structural stability of the building and tank. Accordingly the Hon’ble Court may be requested to either appoint qualified structural engineer or engage some professional from IIT etc. for ascertaining structural stability and exact capacity of water storage tank.
5. In view of the above, the NOC/Fire Safety Certificate from fire safety point of view cannot be issued at this stage. Hon’ble High Court may be apprised accordingly.”
(Emphasis suppl
