The court affirmed that tehbazari site transfers occurring after the cut-off date of February 6, 2007, as specified in the MCD circular, are not eligible for mutation or relocation to alternate sites.

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner – Ms. Nirmala Gupta under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking directions to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter, ‘the MCD’) to issue a relocation letter and for allotment of tehbazari site to the Petitioner at the Mata Sundari Marg, Delhi.

3. The brief background of the Petitioner’s case is that, she claims to be the tehbazari holder of site bearing No. 3543, size 7x5, at, Bapu Market in front of Gandhi Maidan Parking, Chandni Chowk, Delhi (hereinafter, ‘the subject site’).

4. According to the Petitioner, the subject site was originally allotted to one Shri. Inderjeet. However, vide letter dated 27th February, 2012, issued by the MCD, the subject site was transferred in the name of one Mohd Asad.

5. The Petitioner and Mohd Asad are stated to have entered into a partnership vide partnership deed dated 15th March, 2016. Thereafter, the said partnership was dissolved on 30th March, 2016.

6. Certain documents were executed by Mohd Asad in favour of the Petitioner on 30th March, 2016. It is the case of the Petitioner, that she is now the owner of the subject site.

7. Sometime in 2018, the tehbazari sites in Bapu Nagar market were demolished by the MCD, with the intent to shift the same to Mata Sundari Marg. Thus, Petitioner’s case is that she is entitled to a new tehbazari site at Mata Sundari Marg, Delhi.

8. The prayer in this petition is for relocation of the Petitioner and for allotment of a new tehbazari site at Mata Sundari Marg in favour of the Petitioner, and for mutation of the earlier site in favour of the Petitioner.

9. Ld. Counsel for Petitioner submits that the subject site is, in fact, vacant, and the Petitioner is entitled to allotment of the same.

10. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the MCD has relied upon the Circular bearing No. CL&EC/TTR/2009/532 dated 9th October, 2009 issued by the MCD (hereinafter, ‘the circular’).

11. It is submitted by ld. Counsel for the MCD that in the said circular, mutation of site was permitted only for transfers which have taken place prior to 6th February, 2007, in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in W.P.(C) 1699/1987 titled ‘Gainda Ram & Ors. v. MCD’ vide judgment dated 9th April, 2009.

12. Further, it is submitted by ld. Counsel for the MCD that the Scrutiny Committee of the MCD, for the purpose of allotment of site at Mata Sundari Marg had scrutinised 100 files, out of which the file of Mohd. Asad was held to be ineligible for allotment of site at the Mata Sundari Marg. In this regard, reliance is placed upon the Minutes of the Scrutiny Committee titled Shifting of tehbazaries of Bapu Market for Redevelopment/Reconstruction of Gandhi Maidan, MLUG Parking dated 23rd April, 2018. The same is taken on record.

13. The Court has heard the ld. Counsel for the parties. Previously, Mohd Asad had filed W.P. (C) 13904/2025 titled ‘Mohd Asad v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi’, which was dismissed as withdrawn.

14. In the said writ petition, vide order dated 2nd February, 2026, this Court notes that the Petitioner therein i.e., Mohd Asad, was not entitled for any alternate site at Mata Sundri Marg, due to gross concealment of facts.

15. The Petitioner herein, Ms. Nirmala Gupta, who is now stated to have acquired rights from Mohd Asad, has now approached the Court with the prayer that she be recognised as a valid tehbazari holder.

16. In terms of the circular, the transfer or sale or change of hand which has taken place after 6th February, 2007 would not be liable to be recognised.

17. The only ground which is relied upon by the Petitioner is that in 2012, the transfer/ change of hand was recognised by the MCD from Mr. Inderjeet to Mohd. Asad.

18. However, the stand of the MCD is that the said transfer document was prior to 6th January, 2007.

19. Upon a query to the ld. Counsel for the Petitioner, as to what wa