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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Sunil Wadhwa - Appellant
Versus
South Delhi Municipal Commissioner - Respondent
W.P.(C) 1781 of 2021 & CM Appl. 5123 of 2021
Decided On : 26-02-2021




A temporary stay on demolition cannot occur until the appellate tribunal is operational, allowing due process for appeals.

Headnote:(A) The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act - Section related to the establishment and functioning of the Appellate Tribunal - The petitioner sought to restrain the respondent from demolition proceedings until the Appellate Tribunal, MCD is operational. (Paras 2-3)

(B) Administrative Tribunals - The functioning of the Appellate Tribunal is essential for the adjudication of petitions, and parties must be afforded the opportunity to appeal before any coercive action is taken. (Paras 6-8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed a petition against the respondent, aimed at preventing demolition pending the functionality of an appellate tribunal, which had been non-operational until the day of this judgment. (Paras 2-3)

Findings of Court:
The court allowed a brief reprieve from any coercive action for three weeks, permitting the petitioner to file for early hearing on their appeal and stay application. (Paras 6-8)

Issues: The central issue was whether the petitioner could be protected from demolition until the Appellate Tribunal commenced operations. (Paras 2-3)

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Appellate Tribunal must be allowed to function, and until then, no coercive measures could be taken against the petitioner’s property. The tribunal must consider the petitioner's appeal without influence from the court’s prior orders. (Paras 6-9)

Result: Petition disposed of with directions.

JUDGMENT

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

2. Petitioner has filed the subject petition seeking a restraint on the respondent from proceeding with the demolition proceedings against the property of the petitioner till the Appellate Tribunal, MCD becomes operational.

3. It is contended that Appellate Tribunal, MCD was not functional because the Presiding Officer had not yet taken charge.

4. It is informed by learned counsel for the respondent that the Presiding Officer, Appellate Tribunal, MCD has taken charge today and the hearing of appeals have commenced.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appeal of the petitioner stands adjourned to 16.07.2021.

6. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction that no coercive action shall be taken against the property of the petitioner for a period of three weeks from today.

7. Petitioner is permitted to move an application before the Appellate Tribunal, MCD within one week for early hearing of his appeal and stay application. On such an application being filed, Appellate Tribunal, MCD shall take up the stay application for consideration within the said period of three weeks.

8. The continuation of protection thereafter shall be subject to orders to be passed by the Appellate Tribunal, MCD. It is clarified that the Appellate Tribunal, MCD shall consider the appeal/stay application of the petitioner without being influenced by anything stated by this Court in any of its orders.

9. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

10. Copy of the Order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.

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