Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
D.N. Patel, Jyoti Singh, JJ.
Nisha Ara (Coordinator, Right Action Foundation India Trust) - Appellant
Versus
South Delhi Municipal Corporation - Respondent
W.P.(C) 14126 of 2021 & CM Appl. 44597 of 2021
Decided On : 13-12-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks mandamus for demolition. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. writ jurisdiction not suitable for factual disputes. (Para 3) |
| 3. court directs respondents to consider grievances. (Para 4) |
| 4. writ petition disposed with directions. (Para 5) |
JUDGMENT
D.N. Patel, Chief Justice (Oral)--Present Public Interest Litigation has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:
"a) Issue appropriate writ(s), order(s) or direction(s) in the nature of a writ of mandamus thereby directing the respondent No.1, 2 & 5 to immediately take appropriate steps in accordance with law to stop and demolish the illegal and unauthorized construction work being carried out by the respondent No.3 & 4 and to prevent further unauthorized construction by the respondent No.3 & 4 on the property herein above mentioned;
b) Pass any other and further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice."
2. We have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and looked into the facts and circumstances of the case. It is evident that the Petitioner seeks a declaration from this Court that the property in question is illegally constructed by Respondents No.3 and 4 as well as a direction for its demolition.
3. It is a settled law that disputed questions of fact as well as legality or otherwise of any construction, i.e. whether the building is constructed in accordance with sanctioned plans, etc. cannot be adjudicated upon in a writ jurisdiction. It goes without saying that determination of the legality of construction of a building would require evidence, both oral and documentary, including appreciation of the sanction plans, etc. and writ petition is not the appropriate remedy to seek a declaration that the construction of the building is unauthorised. In any event, the petitioner is not remediless and can resort to appropriate remedies for the said reliefs.
4. We, therefore, see no reason to entertain this writ petition and allow the reliefs sought for. Nonetheless, we direct the Respondents to look into the grievances ventilated in the petition and take a considered decision, in accordance with law. Before taking any decision, the concerned Respondents shall give an opportunity of hearing to the owners/occupiers of the property in question.
5. With these observations, writ petition along with pending application is hereby disposed of.
Writ jurisdiction is not suitable for adjudicating disputed questions of fact regarding legality of construction; appropriate remedies must be pursued instead.
Lack of evidence, ground work, and public interest element in a public interest litigation may lead to the dismissal of the petition and imposition of costs on the petitioner.
Public Interest Litigation requires proper standing and evidence; a petitioner must join affected parties and cannot solely rely on hearsay.
Vague allegations in a public interest litigation regarding unauthorized construction without cogent evidence are insufficient for judicial intervention, necessitating proper factual inquiries.
Public interest litigation is not applicable when targeting a specific property owned by an individual, and separate legal actions must be pursued for such disputes.
The court directed authorities to address grievances regarding illegal construction and emphasized accountability in compliance with laws and regulations.
The court emphasized the need for proper grievance redressal regarding alleged illegal construction, aligning with decisions made in precedent cases.
A public interest litigation must be substantiated with credible evidence and involve necessary parties; failure to do so may result in dismissal.
Writ Petitions under Article 226 cannot be used to execute civil court decrees directly.
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
