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.
Santosh Sharma - Appellant
Versus
NDMC - Respondent
W.P.(C) 1524 of 2021 & CM Appl. 4355 of 2021
Decided On : 15-03-2021




Revocation of a building plan requires proper service of notice, adhering to principles of natural justice and giving opportunity to respond.

Headnote:(A) Delhi Municipal Corporation Act - Section 338 - Revocation of sanctioned building plan - Revocation asserted on grounds of misrepresentation and violation of policy - Petitioners argue lack of proper service of show-cause notice; notices returned with 'premises locked' - Court determines the need for fair opportunity for response - Previous order set aside for issuing fresh notice and hearing. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Administrative law - Right to be heard - Requirement of providing adequate opportunity to respond to notices before imposing penalties or revoking licenses. (Para 4)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners challenge the revocation of their building plan under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, contending they were not properly served with the show-cause notice because notices were returned as the premises were locked, and they reside at a different address.

Findings of Court:
The Court recognized the failure to serve a notice appropriately and granted the petitioners a chance to respond, emphasizing the necessity of a speaking order after a personal hearing.

Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners were adequately served with the show-cause notice before the revocation of the building plan.

Ratio Decidendi: The court underscored the importance of natural justice and the right to be heard, stating that the absence of valid notice requires setting aside the revocation and providing a fair hearing opportunity.

Result: Order dated 30.12.2020 set aside; matter remanded for a fresh hearing.

Table of Content
1. revocation of building plan due to misrepresentation. (Para 1)
2. contestation of notice service and petitioners' address. (Para 2 , 3)
3. opportunity for response to show-cause notice. (Para 4)
4. setting aside revocation and directing fresh order. (Para 5 , 6)
5. disposition of petition and procedural directions. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (ORAL)--Petitioners impugn order dated 30.12.2020 passed under Section 338 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act whereby the sanctioned building plan qua the plot of the petitioner i.e. property No.4548/12, Ram Nagar, Tri Nagar, Delhi has been revoked on the alleged ground of misrepresentation and being in violation of the policy/guidelines/provisions of MPD 2021.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/Corporation submits that the show-cause notice was sent by post and twice it came back and thereafter it was pasted on the subject property and despite the same, no reply was received from the petitioners to the show-cause notice.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners never received the show-cause notice and is not residing at the subject address and is residing at of 993/66, Lekhu Nagar, Tri Nagar, Delhi and this address is available in the records of the Corporation.

4. Without getting into the controversy as to whether the petitioners were served with a show-cause notice by pasting or not, since admittedly the notices sent were received back with the report "premises locked" and petitioners are alleged to have been served only by pasting, it would be appropriate that one opportunity is granted to the petitioners to file a response to the show-cause notice and thereafter for respondents to pass a fresh speaking order.

5. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 30.12.2020, insofar as it revokes the sanctioned building plan, is set aside.

6. Respondents shall serve a copy of the show-cause notice on the petitioners through counsel within two days. Petitioners shall thereafter file a reply to the show-cause notice within one week and respondents shall thereafter pass a fresh speaking order on the subject show-cause notice after affording an opportunity of a personal hearing to the petitioner.

7. Petition along with pending application is disposed of in the above terms.

8. All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved.

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