IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
D.N. Patel, Jyoti Singh, JJ.
Mohd. Farooq - Appellant
Versus
State NCT of Delhi - Respondent
W.P.(C) 3332 of 2022
Decided On : 23-02-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for various mandamus directives. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner's grievances regarding illegal construction. (Para 2) |
| 3. authority must address petition as representation. (Para 3) |
| 4. illegal constructions must be demolished if confirmed. (Para 4) |
| 5. no orders on lokayukt appointment needed. (Para 5) |
| 6. petition disposed of accordingly. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
D.N. Patel, Chief Justice (Oral)
CM APPL. 9698/2022 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 3332/2022
1. Present Public Interest Litigation has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing respondent No.1 (Govt of NCTD) to take all actions including demolition action against illegally constructed structure mentioned in the instant petition in a time bound manner.
b) Issue a writ of mandamus or other suitable writ under Article 226 of the constitution of India directing the respondent no.1 (Govt of NCTD) and Respondent no. 2 (The Lieutenant Governor of Delhi U/T) to appoint Lokayukt (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) as the seat/bench is vacant for more than last 10 months.
c) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing respondent No. 3 (Public Works Department) to ensure the stopping of work and take the custody & maintenance of the encroached site under their control and take stern action against the responsible officers who turned blind eyes on this illegal construction.
d) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing respondent No. 4 (Delhi Jal Board)& Respondent no.5 (BSES)to disconnect water &electricity supply to unauthorized constructed property and to take all actions against the person who has been supplying the electricity and water for the construction activities related to above mentioned illegal structure.
e) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the respondent no. 1 & 2 to take appropriate action against the Respondent no. 6 (Amantullah Khan, MLA Okhla constituency) for misusing the MLA LAD funds and action against the Respondent no. 6 & 7 (Abdul Wazir, Counselor, ward no. 102) for misusing their official position. Respondent 1 & 2 also be directed to stop the release of funds sanctioned for this illegal construction for the encroached land.
f) Issue a writ order or direction to the Respondent no. 8 (Site Contractor) to stop the ongoing construction work with immediate effect till the disposal of this petition.
g) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus hereby directing respondent No. 9 (South Delhi Municipal Corporation) to take all necessary steps to stop the illegal construction over encroached land mentioned in the petition and disciplinary action against all the officers who turned blind eye when the unauthorized construction was being raised.
h) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing respondent No.10 (Delhi Development Authority) to ensure safety of land adjacent to the encroached land by taking necessary steps in order to avoid any encroachment over it in future and submit a compliance report to that effect before this Hon'ble court.
i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing respondent No.11 (DCP Law & Order),12 (DCP Traffic) & 13 (SHO, Police Station Shaheen Bagh)to ensure the maintenance of Law & Order and Traffic situation during & after the demolition of encroached site and take appropriate action against the responsible officers who turned blind eyes over this illegal construction.
j) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus thereby directing respondent No.1 to devise mechanism whereby the area Junior Engineer and Assistant Engineer maintain daily records of their visits to the area under their supervision and control and taking of disciplinary actions against them, if they fail to notice any property being
The court directed authorities to address grievances regarding illegal construction and emphasized accountability in compliance with laws and regulations.
Writ jurisdiction is not suitable for adjudicating disputed questions of fact regarding legality of construction; appropriate remedies must be pursued instead.
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.
Public Interest Litigation requires proper standing and evidence; a petitioner must join affected parties and cannot solely rely on hearsay.
Writ jurisdiction cannot adjudicate factual disputes; grievances should be treated as representations for resolution by appropriate authorities under relevant laws.
A public interest litigation must be substantiated with credible evidence and involve necessary parties; failure to do so may result in dismissal.
The legality of construction cannot be ascertained solely from documents; adequate evidence is essential for a writ court to adjudicate such matters.
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.
The court upheld the MCD's authority to issue demolition notices for illegal constructions, emphasizing compliance with statutory procedures.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.