Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA
Sanjay Gupta – Appellant
Versus
South Delhi Municipal Corporation – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks regularization of unapproved structure. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding application processing. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's directive on processing application. (Para 3 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. conclusion and disposal of the petition. (Para 8 , 9) |
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)
CM. APPL. 12178/2021 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 4028/2021 & CM. APPL. 12179/2021
1. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent/Corporation to accept the application for sanction/regularization of the existing structure on property No. 1512, Wazir Nagar, Kotla Mubarakpur, New Delhi.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to order dated 22.12.2020 in W.P. (C) No.10854/2020, petitioner has carried out the rectification of the unauthorized construction and has approached the Corporation for regularization of the existing structure however, the officers of the Corporation have not accepted the application.
3. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation submits that the petitioner may make an application for sanction/regulari
A timely decision on regularization applications is essential to safeguard properties from premature demolition actions.
A property owner can seek de-sealing and regularization for unauthorized constructions, provided rectifications comply with building bye-laws, per the court's directive.
Direction for lawful action regarding unauthorized construction depends on the outcomes of pending appeal and regularization applications, ensuring no prejudice to ongoing legal matters.
The court's decision emphasized the opportunity for the petitioner to seek regularization of the building plan and the restraint on coercive action until the application is disposed of.
Judicial intervention is justified when administrative bodies delay the processing of applications, violating statutory requirements for timely decision-making.
The court's decision was influenced by the need to provide the respondents with an opportunity to approach the appellate Tribunal-MCD and seek remedy in accordance with the law.
The court's decision emphasized the importance of allowing the respondents to avail of their remedy before the Appellate Tribunal-MCD in cases of unauthorized construction and demolition actions.
The court reiterated that unauthorized constructions can be demolished if they do not comply with building bye-laws, while allowing a deferral for an appeal process before the Appellate Tribunal.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
