IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Satish Chandra Sharma, Subramonium Prasad, JJ.
Anita Sharma – Appellant
Versus
East Municipal Corporation & Anr. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 11123 of 2021 & CM APPL. 10096 of 2022
Decided On : 21-03-2023
PIL - Unauthorized Construction - MPD, 2021 - [MPD, 2021, Section 4.4.3A, Section 336 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, Building bye-laws, 2016] - The court considered the unauthorized construction on the subject property and the provisions of MPD, 2021, Section 4.4.3A, Section 336 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, and Building bye-laws, 2016, and found that the construction was as per the sanctioned plan. The court emphasized the need for genuine public interest in PILs and warned against misuse of the PIL mechanism.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a PIL seeking to restrain unauthorized construction on a property, alleging violations of MPD, 2021. The respondent countered that the construction was as per the sanctioned plan.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the construction was as per the sanctioned plan and expressed concern over frivolous PILs consuming valuable court time.
Issues: Unauthorized construction, compliance with MPD, 2021, misuse of PIL mechanism
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for genuine public interest in PILs and cautioned against misuse of the PIL mechanism.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of, and the court desisted from imposing costs on the petitioner, while warning against misuse of the PIL mechanism.
JUDGMENT
1. The instant Writ Petition has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation ("PIL") under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/ order/ direction to Respondent Nos. 1,2 & 3 to restrain Respondent No. 4 from carrying out further construction at No. 9/ 1018 old no. 489 Khasra No. 550/393/61 measuring 3540.88 Sq. Mtrs. situated at Prem Gali East, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi,("Subject Property"), and to further direct Respondent Nos. 1,2 & 3 to take action as per law on the basis of the complaints filed by the Petitioner with the said authorities.
2. The Petitioner herein has stated herself to be a social worker who is actively engaged in helping various Non-Governmental Organizations ("NGOs"). Respondent No. 1 herein is the erstwhile East Delhi Municipal Corporation ("EDMC") which now stands merged with other civic bodies and now comes under the Municipal Corporation of Delhi ("MCD"), Respondent No. 2 is the Monitoring Committee of the MCD, Respondent No. 3 is the Station House Officer ("SHO") of Police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Delhi, under whose jurisdiction it has been stated that the property in question is situate, and Respondent No. 4 herein is M/s Parmesh Multiplex Pvt. Ltd., i.e., the owner of the Subject Property as stated by it on the counter affidavit filed by it.
3. At the outset, it is pertinent to note that the Petitioner had preferred an earlier Writ Petition bearing No. 10500/ 2021 on the same subject matter. However, it came to be dismissed as withdrawn vide an Order dated 20.09.2021 of a Ld. Single Judge of this Court with a right to file a PIL, in accordance with the Delhi High Court Public Interest Litigation Rules, since it was canvassed by the Petitioner therein that the grievances raised were for the benefit of the public at large.
4. It has been stated by the Petitioner that sometime in 2019 when she had visited the area of Prem Gali in Gandhi Nagar, she had noticed a large piece of land being dug up wherein a famous cinema hall named as 'Laxmi Cinema. used to function on the Subject Property. It is the case of the Petitioner that the construction which is being undertaken at the Subject Property is illegal and unauthorised. The Petitioner has stated that she received several complaints from local residents and senior citizens regarding the illegal and unauthorized construction at the Subject Property. It is stated by the Petitioner that the complainants had requested the Petitioner to move the Court on their behalf as they cannot take legal recourse by themselves. It is further stated that no action is being taken by the MCD and other departments on the written complaints made by the Petitioner regarding the illegal and unauthorised construction being carried out on the Subject Property by Respondent No. 4. Hence, the Petitioner has been constrained to move this Court vide the instant Writ Petition.
5. The Petitioner has submitted that the illegal and unauthorised construction on the Subject Property is violating the Master Plan for Delhi, 2021 ("MPD, 2021"). It was stated that when she was visiting the locality of Gandhi Nagar, Delhi, she saw digging work ongoing at the Subject Property and at the relevant point in time, ground at least 30-40 feet below the road level had been dug up. It has been stated that upon inquiring from people within the locality, it came to her knowledge that a shopping complex with two floors below ground level, i.e., two basements will be laid, in order to provide parking space for shops which would be constructed in the Subject Property. It has been submitted that in the area of Gandhi Nagar and Laxmi Nagar, there have been many unfortunate incidents of building collapses which have claimed the lives of people. Various examples of the same were cited by the Petitioner along with annexures of newspaper clippings to substantiate her contentions. It is also stated that due to the locality.s proximity with the Yamuna River, th
The need for genuine public interest in PILs and the caution against misuse of the PIL mechanism
Public interest litigations must avoid delay and vagueness in claims; authorities should handle illegal construction issues, with the courts exercising restraint in ongoing matters.
Public interest litigation dismissed as abuse of process where filed with suppressed facts, private motives against developer, raising disputed plan compliances without genuine public interest.
The court affirmed that any citizen can file complaints regarding unauthorized constructions, emphasizing strict enforcement of planning laws to prevent illegal activities.
The petitioner has a remedy of appeal and the writ petition is dismissed.
The court highlighted the importance of adhering to building permissions and procedures outlined under municipal law in construction matters.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.