Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MINI PUSHKARNA
Mohit Goel – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition filed under article 226. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments of petitioners against mcd's actions. (Para 3) |
| 3. respondents' counterarguments regarding case maintainability. (Para 4) |
| 4. court's decision on maintaining status quo. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 5. details on land use history illustrating legal context. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. discussion on layout plan amendments and their legality. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. mcd's authority regarding land use as per regulations. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 8. court's endorsement of mcd's decision for school use. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 9. final judgment affirming dismissal of writ petition. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
MINI PUSHKARNA, J.
1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, seeking, inter alia, directions to respondent nos. 2 to 4, i.e., Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”), to comply with their undertaking dated 28th September, 2011, given before the District Court, Tis Hazari, Delhi in Suit No. 274/1988 (New No. 1827/2009), titled as “Model Town Owners and Residents Society (Regd.) Versus Municipal Corporation of Delhi”, whereby,
The court affirmed that MCD's land use changes from park to school are valid as they conform to approved zoning and demonstrate the necessity for school playground facilities.
The court upheld the DDA's authority to allot land for a Gurudwara, finding no evidence that the land was designated as a green area, thus dismissing the writ petition.
Modification of land reserved for public purposes requires valid legal processes, including notification and consultation with affected parties, as determined by relevant sections of the Town Plannin....
NGT lacks jurisdiction over matters adjudicated by High Court; no new cause post final writ decision.
Possession rights established through prior court judgments prevail over unresolved title disputes, and municipal decisions regarding land development must adhere to judicially recognized ownership.
Point of Law : Question of F.A.R./additional F.A.R. and consent of the petitioner society, as settled vide order is also linked to the issues concerning the correctness of the deed of declaration, th....
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
