The ROW includes the complete area between two buildings lying opposite from each other.

LPA 328/2020

$~

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment pronounced on : 04.12.2023

+

LPA 328/2020 and CM APPL. 27959/2020

SUNIL B. SHARMA & ORS.

... Appellants

versus

SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL

CORPORATION & ORS.

.... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Appellants

:

Mr Vikas Singh, Sr. Advocate with Mr

Gaurav Sharma, Mr Prateek Bhatia and

Mr Dhawal Mohan, Advocates.

For the Respondents

:

Ms Puja Kalra, Standing Counsel with

Mr Virendra Singh and Ms Ankita

Sharma, Advocates for Respondent

No.1/MCD.

Mr R.K. Dhawan, Standing Counsel

with Mr Vinod Teny and Ms Vanshika

Agarwal, Advocates for Respondent

No.2/DDA.

Mr Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Advocate with Mr

Rohit

Khurana,

Advocate

for

Respondent No.3.

Ms Pragya Barsaiyan, Advocate for Mr

Gautam Narayan, ASC for Respondent

No.4/GNCTD.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MS JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

[Physical Court Hearing/ Hybrid Hearing]

Digitally Signed

By:YASHPAL GROVER

Signing Date:05.12.2023

03:21:02

Signature Not Verified

LPA 328/2020

JUDGMENT

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.:

1. The present Appeal has been filed assailing the validity of the

Judgment dated 31.08.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge

[hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Judgment”] whereby the

learned Single Judge disposed of the Writ Petition filed by the

Appellants.

2. The challenge briefly arises in respect of the Right of Way

[hereinafter referred to as “ROW”] and its measurement in respect

of a portion of the Outer Ring Road which forms part of Kalkaji

Colony in the vicinity of Nehru Place, New Delhi.

3. The Appellants are residents of Kalkaji and owners of plot no. CC-

23, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019, who made various representations

with respect to illegal constructions made by their neighbour, i.e.,

Respondent No. 3 who resides at Plot No. CC-24, Kalkaji, New

Delhi-110019 [hereinafter referred to as “said property”].

4. The Appellant's had initially filed a Petition before the learned

Single Judge seeking quashing of the building plan as sanctioned by

the Respondent No. 2/MCD as well as in respect of other approvals

granted to Respondent No. 3 with respect to said property. By the

impugned judgment, this challenge was repelled by the learned

Single Judge. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge,

the Appellants have filed this Appeal.

5. It is the contention of the Appellants that the construction of a

hotel/guest house on the said property has been carried out by

Respondent No. 3 in violation of the Master Plan for Delhi, 2021

Digitally Signed

By:YASHPAL GROVER

Signing Date:05.12.2023

03:21:02

Signature Not Verified

LPA 328/2020

[hereinafter referred to as “Master Plan”], Zonal Development Plans

as appearing in the Master Plan as well as the Unified Building Bye

Laws for Delhi, 2016 [hereinafter referred to as “Building Bye

Laws”] and the sanctioned building plan.

5.1 The Respondent No. 1 had granted permission to Respondent No. 3

for running of a guest house by its letter dated 07.01.2008 subject to

the terms and conditions set forth therein and upon payment of

mixed use charges which, admittedly, have been paid.

6. Mr Vikas Singh, Senior Advocate who appears on behalf of the

Appellants has made the following submissions:

(i) The road abutting the property of the Appellants is a 9 meter wide

service road which is separated from the Outer Ring Road by a wall

of about 7 feet in height and that the Outer Ring Road is at a much

higher level than the service road. Photographic evidence of the

same was handed over during submissions.

(ii) In terms of Master Plan and the guidelines for Mixed Land Use

thereunder, certain activities are permitted which can be exercised in

a residential colony, based on Mixed Use Regulations which forms

part of Para 15.0 of Master Plan. Since the said property is in a

colony named Kalkaji, which falls into categor