$~49

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 14.11.2025

+ W.P.(C) 17340/2025 & CM APPL. 71379/2025

MOHD MANSOOR .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Javed Ahmad, Ms. Aakriti Aditya and Mr. Adnan Khan, Advocates

Mob: 9810518138

Email: javedahmadadv@gmail.com

versus

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ORS.

.....Respondents

Through: Ms. Ankita Sarangi, Advocate for MCD

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL):

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking prayer for quashing the notices/order dated 03rd November, 2025 and 06th November, 2025, passed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”), whereby, the MCD has intimated that the shop of the petitioner will be sealed and the proceedings to revoke the trading license of the petitioner has commenced, which is valid upto 26th March, 2026.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been engaged in a scrap-warehousing business at premises No. A-9 (Ground Floor), Old Double Storey, Lajpat Nagar-IV, New Delhi-110024, for the last twenty years.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has a valid license issued from the MCD and draws the attention of this Court to the license document issued in favour of the petitioner by Central Licensing and Enforcement Cell, MCD, which is reproduced as under:

4. By referring to the aforesaid license, it is the case of the petitioner that the license of the petitioner is valid till 31st March, 2026.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that notice dated 06th November, 2025 was received by the petitioner, wherein, directions have been issued by the office of the Assistant Commissioner, Central Zone, MCD, for revocation of the Municipal Trade License of the petitioner. The said letter dated 06th November, 2025, is reproduced as under:

6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further draws the attention of this Court to the notice dated 03rd November, 2025, issued under Section 345-A of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 by the Building Department, Central Zone, MCD, which is reproduced as under:

7. By referring to the aforesaid, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that after receipt of the aforesaid notice, the petitioner has removed all the incriminating goods. He draws the attention of this Court to the photographs attached with the present petition, two of which, are reproduced as under:

8. He submits that without granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in this regard, the aforesaid action is sought to be taken against the petitioner.

9. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

10. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents-MCD submits that a complaint case is pending against the petitioner before the Public Grievances Commission (“PGC”). She submits that the violation and misuse being carried out by the petitioner has been noticed by the department and that the petitioner was found to be misusing the premises for trading of plastic goods, iron junk and other waste materials, which is in complete violation of the permissible use of the said property, and also against the Master Plan of Delhi, 2021 (“MPD 2021”).

11. Learned counsel appearing for the MCD relies upon Clause 15.6.2 of MPD 2021, to submit that junk shop (except paper and glass waste), are not allowed under the mixed use.

12. She, thus, submits that since the petitioner was found to be misusing the premises in question, action has rightly been initiated by the MCD.

13. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is ready to submit an undertaking before the MCD that the petitioner shall not use the premises except for the permissible use under the MPD 2021.

14. Responding to the aforesaid, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-MCD submits that since misuse was found in the premises in question, the petitioner would be liable to pay m