$~31 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 05^th December, 2025 + W.P.(C) 16681/2025 & CM APPL. 68454/2025 RAJENDER SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Deepesh Bhardwaj, Advocate versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Parminder Singh, SC for MCD with Mr. Aryanshu Vaibhav Gautam, Advocate Mob: 7042261567 Mr. Kushagra Kumar, SPC with Ms. Pragati Trivedi, Advocate for R-2 with SI Rohit, PS Laxmi Nagar Mr. Tushar Sannu, Mr. Parvin Bansal and Mr. Saurabh Pandey, Advocates for GNCTD Mob: 9911991166 CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL):

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”) to take action against the illegal and unauthorized construction raised in the property bearing No. 39-B, Mohan Park, Gali No. 4, West Guru Angad Nagar, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi

110092, measuring 120 square yards.

2. When the matter was listed for hearing on the last date, i.e., 03^rd November, 2025, an objection was raised on behalf of the MCD that the petitioner did not stay in the property bearing No. 31-B, Mohan Park, West Guru Angad Nagar, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092, as mentioned in the Memo of Parties of the present writ petition.

3. Accordingly, the Station House Officer (“SHO”), Police Station- Laxmi Nagar, was directed to visit the property of the petitioner in order to inform the Court as to whether the petitioner stayed at the premises in question. The relevant portion of the order dated 03^rd November, 2025, reads as under:

“xxx xxx xxx

4. Responding to the present writ petition, learned counsel for MCD submits that the copy of the present writ petition was served upon the MCD on 07^th October, 2025. He submits that after receipt of the copy of the present writ petition, MCD intended to carry out inspection of the aforesaid property. However, he submits that the said property could not be traced. Accordingly, the concerned officials of the MCD sought to contact the petitioner.

5. It is submitted that the officials of the MCD visited the property of the petitioner as per the Memo of parties, which is as follows:

Rajender Singh S/o Sh. Pyare Lal R/o 31-B, Mohan Park, West Guru angad Nagar, Laxmi Nagar Delhi-110092

6. Upon visit of the property, the officials of the MCD found that the petitioner did not stay in the aforesaid property. He further submits that inquiry from the local residents also reveals that no one was aware about the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the Station House Officer (“SHO”) of Laxmi Nagar is directed to visit the property of the petitioner, i.e., 31-B, Mohan Park, West Guru Angad Nagar, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092.

8. The SHO, Police Station-Laxmi Nagar, shall enquire as to whether the petitioner stays in the said property and file a report with regard thereto, before this Court.

9. Since SHO, Police Station-Laxmi Nagar is not a party before this Court, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the SHO, Police Station-Laxmi Nagar, is impleaded as respondent no. 2, in the present matter.

10. Issue notice to newly impleaded respondent no. 2, through Standing Counsel-Union of India.

11. Let Court Notice be issued to the Standing Counsel-Union of India as well as SHO, Police Station-Laxmi Nagar, with clear directions to file report before this Court, before the next date of hearing.

12. List for consideration on 05^th December, 2025.

xxx xxx xxx”

4. Today, learned counsel appearing for the SHO, Police Station-Laxmi Nagar, has handed over to this Court a Verification Report, which is taken on record.

5. As per the said Verification Report, the petitioner does not reside at the address in question.

6. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he has instructions to withdraw the present writ petition.

7. This Court notes that the Verification Report of the SHO, Police Station-Laxmi Nagar is categorical to the effect that the petitioner does not reside in the property in question.

8. T