Back
SANJEEV SACHDEVA
Jogender Kumar – Appellant
Versus
East Delhi Municipal Corporation – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. - The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner seeks a direction to respondent, Municipal Corporation to demolish the alleged illegal and unauthorized construction being raised by respondent No.2 in property number D-311, Gali No.14, New Ashok Nagar, East Delhi.
3. The petitioner is a resident of property number D-303, Gali No.14, New Ashok Nagar, East Delhi.
4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2, on advance notice, submits that selective action is sought to be taken against the property of the respondent as respondent is a witness to a Kalandara, which has been registered against the petitioner under Section 207 Cr.P.C.
5. He further submits that a demolition notice was issued in the name of the son of respondent No.2 with whom respondent No.2 has strained relations. Further, respondent No.2 has already filed an appeal which is pending before the Appellate Tribunal, MCD.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent, Corporation submits that part demolition action was taken on 27.12.2019 and a further demolition notice has been issued on 19.04.2021. He, however, concedes that respondent No.2 has already filed an appeal be
The court's decision was based on the respondent's assurance of further action in accordance with the law and the pending appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, MCD.
The court emphasized that unauthorized construction enforcement must respect legal processes and pending appeals, leaving petitioner's standing open for further consideration.
Municipal authorities possess the jurisdiction to enforce laws against unauthorized construction, which must be acted upon as per legal provisions, while respecting the appeals process.
The need for the Corporation to take action in accordance with law and the rights of owners/occupiers to defend proceedings before the appellate Tribunal, MCD.
Municipal authorities must operate within legal frameworks when enforcing demolition orders, respecting property owners' rights to appeal.
The court's decision was influenced by the need to provide the respondents with an opportunity to approach the appellate Tribunal-MCD and seek remedy in accordance with the law.
The court's decision emphasized the importance of allowing the respondents to avail of their remedy before the Appellate Tribunal-MCD in cases of unauthorized construction and demolition actions.
The court reiterated that unauthorized constructions can be demolished if they do not comply with building bye-laws, while allowing a deferral for an appeal process before the Appellate Tribunal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
