A contempt petition cannot be sustained when a municipal authority's departure from a previous undertaking before the Court is justified by subsequent statutory findings through a quasi-judicial process, provided such actions do not demonstrate active, malicious, or willful defiance of the Court's mandate.

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeks the following prayers: -

“A. initiate civil contempt proceedings against the contemners jointly and severally for willful non compliance of the order dated 13th August 2019 in the Civil Writ Petition No. 8752/2019 titled Desh Raj Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation in respect of demolishing of entire construction at 99A Masjid Moth;

B. pass any other order/direction as this Honourable Court deems just and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. Vide order dated 13.08.2019, learned Single Judge of this Court while disposing of W.P.(C) 8752/2019 passed the following order:-

“The challenge in this petition is to an order dated March 31, 2019 passed by the respondent SDMC. The ground being that respondent Corporation is not taking any action against the property No. 99-A, Masjid Moth, South Extension Part-II, New Delhi on the purported ground that the property is protected under the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2011.

Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation states, the very basis on which the petition has been filed is unsustainable inasmuch as at page 43 of the paper book wherein a categorical stand has been taken by the Corporation that the property is not eligible for relief under the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provision) Act, 2011. In other words, the order dated January 31, 2019 shall be taken to its logical conclusion. In fact, he states, a demolition is scheduled on August 23, 2019 with respect to the entire property.

If that be so, Mr. N. Prabhakar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states, nothing further survives in the petition and the petition be disposed of. Ordered accordingly.”

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that despite the categorical directions passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 8752/2019, MCD did not take any action against the subject property. It is further submitted that the said directions were not brought to the notice of learned ATMCD, when the protection was granted to the occupiers of the subject property.

5. Status report dated 27.08.2020 has been filed on behalf of the respondent/ MCD, wherein it has been recorded as under:-

“3. That the Hon'ble High Court vide its order / impugned order dated 13/08/2019, passed the following directions in Writ Petition bearing Civil No. 8752 of 2019:-

“---

The challenge in this petition is to an order dated March 31, 2019 passed by the respondent SDMC. The ground being that respondent Corporation is not taking any action against the property No. 99-A, Masjid Moth, South Extension Part-II, New Delhi on the purported ground that the property is protected under the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2011.

Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, learned counsel appealing for the respondent Corporation states, the very basis on which the petition has been filed is unsustainable inasmuch as at page 43 of the paper book wherein a categorical stand has been taken by the Corporation that the property is not eligible for relief under the. National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provision) Act, 2011. In other words, the order dated January 31, 2019 shall be taken to its logical conclusion. In fact, he states, a demolition is scheduled on August 23, 2019 with respect to the entire property.

If that be so, Mr. N. Prabhakar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states, nothing further survives in the petition and the petition be disposed of Order