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

2022 Supreme(Del) 1652

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Ankit Dabas - Appellant
Versus
North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 1398 of 2021, Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 3983 of 2021
Decided On : 23-02-2022

Advocates appeared:
Anusuya Salwan, Advocate, Abhishek Pundir, Advocate, Nikita Salwan, Advocate, Bankim Garg, Advocate, Chaitanya Bansal, Advocate, Anand Prakash, Advocate, Varsha Arya, Advocate, Akhil Raj, Advocate, Vipul Pankaj Sanghi, Advocate, Pradeep Kumar Arya, Advocate, Gaurav Chaudhry, Advocate, Deepanshu Khatri, Advocate

The principle of negative equality does not apply, and action can be taken against unauthorized construction regardless of inaction by the Corporation on other illegal constructions in the society.

Headnote:

Unauthorized Construction - Property Dispute - The court held that the principle of negative equality does not apply, and one who raises unauthorized construction cannot resist action solely on the ground of inaction of the Corporation regarding other illegal constructions in the society.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner seeks direction for action against unauthorized construction in a housing society. Corporation filed a status report stating unauthorized construction has been booked and a demolition order passed, but could not take place due to non-availability of police force.

Finding of the Court:

The court disposed of the petition, binding the Corporation to take appropriate action in accordance with law. It also directed the Corporation to consider any regularization application by the society expeditiously and issued a direction to the concerned police officers to provide appropriate police force if requested by the Corporation.

Issues: Maintainability of the petition, principle of negative equality, regularization application by the society, non-availability of police force.

Ratio Decidendi: The principle of negative equality does not apply, and action can be taken against unauthorized construction regardless of inaction by the Corporation on other illegal constructions in the society.

Final Decision: The petition is disposed of, binding the Corporation to take appropriate action in accordance with law and directing consideration of any regularization application by the society expeditiously.

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. - The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent/Corporation to take action against the illegal unauthorized construction carried out by respondent No.4 in Flat No.4a, Sandeep Cooperative Group Housing Society, Plot No.35, Rohini, Sector-13, Delhi.

3. Status report has been filed by the Corporation stating that the unauthorized construction has been booked and a demolition order has been passed. However, demolition could not take place as there was non-availability of police force.

4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4 submits that not only respondent No.4, but several other flat owners have also made similar additions/alterations in their flats.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent No.4 objects to the maintainability of the petition on the ground that the petitioner has adopted a 'pick and choose policy'.

6. This is disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the property of the petitioner is right adjoining the property of respondent No.4 and petitioner is directly affected by the illegal construction raised.

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 submits that since others have also made similar additions, action cannot be taken against his property alone.

8. I am unable to accept the contention of learned counsel for respondent No.4 on the principle of negative equality. One who allegedly raises unauthorized construction cannot resist the action proposed by the Municipal Corporation solely on the ground of inaction of the Corporation qua other illegal and unauthorized constructions in the society.

9. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3/society submits that since several of the occupants of the society have made similar construction, an application for regularization has been filed by the Corporation and the same is pending.

10. Learned counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that he has no instructions with regard to pendency of any such application.

11. Be that as it may, since the status report of the Corporation states that the construction is unauthorized and illegal, demolition order has been passed and action in accordance with law is being taken, this petition is disposed of, binding the Corporation down to the statement made in the status report that appropriate action in accordance with law shall be taken.

12. However, it is clarified that that in case any regularization application has been filed by the society, the same be considered by the Corporation expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks and subject to the outcome of the regularization application, further action be taken in accordance with law.

13. Further, direction is issued to respondent No.2, the concerned police officers to provide appropriate police force, if so requested by the Corporation in accordance with law.

14. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

15. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through e-mail by the Court Master.

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top