JUDGMENT

1. The present petition under Section 11 read with section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971[CC Act], is filed by the petitioner, alleging that the respondent officials of the erstwhile North Delhi Municipal Corporation, since renamed Municipal Corporation of Delhi[MCD] have committed the contempt of the order/directions dated 30.11.2017 passed by this Court in the writ petition W.P. (C) 7821/2017 and subsequent directions contained in the order dated 26.02.2018 in CONT. CAS (C) 138/2018.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND:

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the petitioner acquired ownership title of terrace/roof rights of the suit property from his sister, who was the owner with terrace/roof rights of the second floor of this property. She sought sanction of the building plan for 3rd floor on this property and the same was declined by the respondent vide communication dated 19.07.2017 on the ground that floor-wise sanction/regularisation could not be approved. The same was challenged in the writ petition W.P. (C) 7821/2017, wherein while relying upon Harish Bajaj and Anr. v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 2459 vide order dated 30.11.2017 , the following directions were passed: -

"In view of the foregoing, communication dated 19.07.20I7 is set aside and quashed and the writ petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondent to process the application of the applicant for sanction of the building plans, within four weeks from today. It is made clear that the application would be processed in consonance with the prevalent building bye-laws and MPD-2021, but, for the insistence of NOC of the co-owner. Petition and the pending applications stand disposed off accordingly."

3. Aggrieved by non-compliance of order dated 30.11.2017 on the part of the officials of respondent, the petitioner filed contempt petition being CONT. CAS (C) 138/2018 wherein learned counsel for respondent submitted that the application of the petitioner for sanction of building plan was under consideration and decision of the same would be conveyed to the petitioner. This Court disposed of the matter giving the following directions vide order dated 26.02.2018: -

"...Ms. Puja Kalra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents on the advance notice states, the application of the applicant for sanction of building plans is under consideration and the decision and communication thereof shall be taken /sent to the petitioner within three weeks/one week from today.

Noting and binding the respondents to the statement made by their counsel, the contempt petition is closed. If the petitioner is still aggrieved by any in action on the part of the respondents, liberty is granted to the petitioner to revive this contempt petition."

4. Eventually, the respondent MCD vide communication[D/AE(B)/KBZ/2018/642] dated 25.04.2018 has rejected the application of petitioner for sanction of construction on the 3rd floor of the subject property inter alia stating that their decision is based upon consideration and scrutiny of the application in consonance with prevalent building bye-laws and MPD 2021, on the grounds enlisted as follows: -

"1. No sanction building plan of the existing construction has been submitted.

2. There is no structural stability certificate available on records as such to prove that the entire structure from ground to second and proposed third floor would be safe/stable structurally post construction of the third floor.

3. As per plan, there is infringement of front set back at GF, FF and SF which is not permissible.

4. The site has been inspected and it is found that there are projection on public land in the side lane at GF, FF and SF which is not permissible.

5. Existing construction at Third Floor has not been mentioned, in the proposal."

5. It is the case of the petitioner that on receiving the aforesaid order dated 25.04.2018, she submitted point-wise reply vide letter dated 08/09.05.2018 wherein she made a representation as under:-

" (1)