A.No. 258/18 Status report filed. Original record has...

A.No. 258/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Ashutosh proxy counsel for Sh. Amit

Kumar, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Mikhil Sharda, counsel for respondent

alongwith Sh. Ravi Kumar, AE(B).

Status report filed. Original record has already

produced.

This appeal pertains to the property No.205, back

portion, Munirka Village.

As per original record, the property was booked on

26.05.2018 for unauthorized construction in the shape of

ground floor to part fifth floor. Show cause notice was

issued on the same day which was served by way of

pasting. No photographs of the pasting, is placed on

record.

AE(B) submitted that notice was duly served upon

the appellant who was appeared and filed the reply and join

the proceedings and thereafter speaking order dated

27.02.2018 was passed.

In the speaking order appellant was directed to

demolish unauthorized construction of fourth floor and part

fifth floor because the remaining property was found old

constructed.

As per status report, respondent has extended the

relief of the construction raised up to third floor in terms of

immunity provided in respect of properties or construction

in existence prior to 01.06.2014 upto 31.12.2020. No action

has been taken after passing of the impugned order at

fourth floor and fifth floor in pursuance of the impugned

order.

Orally it is submitted by the AE(B) that he has issued

a vacation notice of fourth floor and part fifth floor which are

occupied.

Proxy counsel for appellant seeks adjournment to

argue on interim application.

A.No. 258/18

On perusal of the appeal, it is found that the

appellant has not placed on record any documents to show

that the fourth and part fifth floor exists before 01.06.2014.

Respondent is at liberty to take action on fourth floor

and part fifth floor in pursuance of the demolition order

dated 27.02.2018.

Action taken report be filed on next date of hearing.

Put up for that purpose and for final arguments / filing

of further documents, if any on 12.04.2019.

Copy of the order be given Dasti to both the parties,

as prayed.

(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.

Appellate Tribunal:MCD 04.12.2018

A.No. 721/17 & 728/`17 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Fauzad Abbasi, proxy counsel for Mohd.

Amanullah, counsel for appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. B.P. Dubey, AE(B).

Status report in compliance of the order dated

16.01.2018 filed stating that appellant in the appeal has

stated that his property has been booked as J-49. The

area JE(B) has inspected the said property and found that

property of the appellant i.e. Ms. Seema Bisht is J-49, East

Vinod Nagar, which is old number and now new number of

the same property is J-21, East Vinod Nagar, Delhi. The

copy of the status report supplied.

Put up for arguments on 23.07.2019. Interim stay, if

any, is extended till next date.



A.No. 725/17 & 726/`17 04.12.2018



Sh. Shekhar, proxy counsel for Sh. Sandeep

Kaushik, counsel for MCD alongwith Sh. B.P.

Dubey, AE(B).

Status report filed stating that regularization

application dated 15.02.2018 has been rejected and the

rejection order was communicated to the appellant on

16.11.2018 through speed post. Copy of status report

supplied.





A.No. 716/17 & 720/`17 04.12.2018



Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, proxy counsel for Sh.

Shashi Kant, counsel for MCD alongwith Sh.

B.P. Dubey, AE(B).

Status report filed stating that regularization

application dated 15.02.2018 has been rejected and the

rejection order was communicated to the appellant on

16.11.2018 through speed post. Copy of status report

supplied.





A.No. 722/17 & 727/`17 04.12.2018



Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. B.P. Dubey, AE(B).

It is stated that notice has been sent to the appellant

regarding withdrawal of the Vakalatnama, however, proof of

the service of the said notice not filed.

Adjournment sought to file the proof of the service of

the notice upon the appellant on next date of hearing.

In the meantime court notice be issued to the

appellant to appear in person on date fixed.

Put up for appearance of the appellant and

arguments on 23.07.2019. Interim stay, if any, is extended

till next date.



A.No. 125/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Vimal Dhingra alongwith Sh. Bhopal Singh

and Shahzad Hussain, Advocate.

Sh. Madan Sagar, counsel for respondent.

On the last date, ld. counsel for appellant sought

adjournment to file appeal against the demolition order

because the present appeal has been filed against the work

stop notice. The appellant has not challenged the

demolition order before this Tribunal. The present appeal is

against the work stop notice is not maintainable.

Counsel for appellant submits that at the time when

this appeal was filed and work stop notice was issued, there

was no demolition order. The appeal against the order /

letter dated 06.02.2018 has been filed to which notice was

issued. The demolition order has been passed on

16.02.2018. Despite knowledge of the said order, the

demolition order is not yet challenged and there is question

of maintainability of the present appeal against the letter

dated 06.02.2018 after passing of the demolition order.

Ld. counsel for appellant submits that appeal against

the letter dated 06.02.2018 is still maintainable despite

passing of the demolition order and seeks adjournment to

satisfy this Tribunal in this regard.

Put up for arguments on the maintainability of the

present appeal on 19.02.2019.



A.No. 252/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. S.D. Ansari, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Sanjay Gupta counsel for applicant.

Sh. Abdul Haq, JLO from MCD.

Dy. Commissioner was directed to appear in person

on previous date. No one is appeared despite service.

JLO pointed out that service of this appeal has not

been issued.

Let notice of the appeal and application be issued to

the respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer.

AE(B) is directed to appear in person alongwith entire

record of the proceedings, status report and reply of the

appeal on date fixed.

AE(B) concerned to remain present on date fixed.

Put up this matter for producing the record and

appearance of the AE(B) concerned and for filing reply of

the application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC and arguments

on 10.07.2019. Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date

Copy of the application under order 1 Rule 10

supplied.



A.No. 280/18 04.12.2018

Present : None for the appellant.

Sh. Jatin Aggarwal, counsel for respondent.

Appellant is not appearing for the last two dates after

filing of the application for withdrawal of the appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed in default as well

as for non prosecution.

Demolition order dated 07.02.2018 is accordingly

confirmed.

Respondent is at liberty to take action as per law in

respect of the property of the appellant.

Appeal file be consigned to record room.

Record of the respondent, if any be returned to the

respondent.

Respondent is directed to file action taken report on

09.07.2019. Registrar is directed to prepare a

miscellaneous file for this purpose. Copy of this order be

placed in miscellaneous file.



A.No. 849/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Vikas Sharma, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Vijay Tyagi, counsel for respondent.

Original record and status report already filed.

As per the status report the property was booked on

17.03.2018 for unauthorized construction in the shape of rooms,

kitchen etc. at ground floor, first floor, and second floor without

obtaining the Sanctioned Building Plan. Show cause notice was

issued on 17.03.2018 served by speed post. Demolition order

was passed on 02.04.2018 on the ground that construction was

raised without prior approval of the competent authority.

As per record demolition action has been taken on the

second floor on 21.04.2018 wherein T-iron stone slab has been

demolished and front side brick work, window also demolished.

Complete action could not be taken due to shortage of time.

Further demolition action took place on 03.05.2018 and

also on 24.11.2018 when one panel and stone roof of the second

floor was demolished.

Sealing order u/s 345A of the DMC Act has already been

passed on 22.06.2018 but due to shortage of time sealing action

could not be taken.

The property is situated in Vishwas Nagar, Delhi which is

stated to be unauthorized regularized colony.

Ld. counsel for respondent at the very outset took an

objection on the maintainability of the appeal saying that it is

barred by limitation.

It is pointed out that as per record the first demolition

action took place on 21.04.2018 and the knowledge has to be

impugned to the appellant from the said date but the appeal has

been filed on 20.11.2018.

I have gone through the application seeking condonation

of delay.

The appellant has sought condonation of delay on the

ground that appellant received the show cause notice only on

16.11.2018. No copy of the demolition order has ever been

A.No. 849/18

supplied to the appellant. The respondent official allowed the

appellant to take the photograph of the demolition order only on

16.11.2018 and as such there is no delay in filing the present

appeal.

Ld. counsel has pointed out that the track report of service

by speed post is not placed on record by the respondent.

Ld. counsel for respondent seeks adjournment to place on

record the track record of service.

Put up for filing the track record and final arguments on

09.05.2019.

In view of the facts and circumstances, respondent is

restrained from taking any coercive action in the property of the

appellant bearing no. 618 (part), Main Pandav Road, Ravi Dass

Gali, Vishwas Nagar, Shahdara, Delhi-32 in pursuance of

demolition order dated 02.04.2018 till next date of hearing.

However, this order is subject to any order passed by the

Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court / Hon’ble NGT about

sealing and demolition in respect of the property in question.

Appellant is directed to file affidavit giving details of

construction with measurements of the existing construction

alongwith existing site plan and photographs of the property in

question within five working days, failing which stay order granted

shall deemed to be vacated.

Copy of the affidavit will be provided to concerned AE(B)

by the appellant, who shall verify whether details of construction

mentioned in the affidavit is correct or not.

Appellant is also directed not to carry out any addition,

alteration, repair or construction and shall also not create any

third party interest in the property in question.

Copy of the order be given Dasti to counsel for appellant,

as prayed.



A.No. 913/17 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Dinesh Tiwari, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Renu Soni, Nodal Officer for SDMC

alongwith Sh. B.S. Gupta, AE(B).

Sh. Khalid Salil, counsel for applicant.

Notice of the application u/s 151 for permission to

construct toilet and bathroom has been served upon the

respondent. Reply not filed.

Another application was moved under Order 1 Rule

10 CPC was moved. Reply not filed by the respondent as

well as by the appellant.

Application perused.

It is stated that he has filed Writ Petition

No.5570/2016 in the High Court titled as Narender Kumar

vs SDMC. He has also filed a contempt petition No.137/17

for non compliance of the order of the Hon’ble High Court by

the respondent.

It is further stated that vide order dated 12.12.2017,

Hon’ble High Court granted liberty to the present applicant

to approach this Tribunal and to place before it relevant

record/documents.

It is therefore, stated that applicant is a necessary

party.

I perused the order dated 12.12.2017 of the High

Court in contempt petition CAS(C( 137/2017 wherein liberty

has been granted to the applicant on the submissions of his

counsel to place the relevant record/documents before

ATMCD.

Arguments on maintainability of the application under

order 1 Rule 10 CPC heard. Even if it is presumed that all

the averments made in the application is correct, then also

in this proceeding between the appellant and the MCD the

applicant has no right to participate and he can not become

a party as there is a clear-cut judgment of Delhi High Court

in case Hardayal Singh Mehta Vs MCD, AIR 1990 Delhi

A.No. 913/17

170 in which it is held that in the matter between the

appellant and the MCD, no third person can join and

become a party to such proceedings and in such

proceedings the application under order 1 Rule 10 CPC is

not maintainable. Any dispute between the applicant and

the appellant has to be dealt with and to be decided by the

Civil Court separately. Accordingly, application moved by

applicant under order 1 Rule 10 CPC is hereby dismissed.

However, the applicant is permitted to file the documents, if

any and to orally argue the matter at the final arguments

stage.

I have heard the ld. counsel for appellant on the

order u/s 151 CPC wherein it is prayed that appellant is

residing in the property wherein respondent has demolished

the toilet and bathroom of the premises before filing of the

present appeal.

It is further stated that toilet and bathroom is very

necessary requirement for the appellant and his family

members.

Nodal Officer pointed out that as per record part

demolition action took place on 24.03.2017 as well as on

22.05.2017 and 20.09.2017.

On 20.09.2017 demolition action took place wherein

with the help of PS: Palam Village demolished one room,

toilet, bathroom etc at ground floor. It is these bathroom

and toilet which appellant wants to reconstruct again.

Unless and until the appeal is decided the claim of

the appellant to reconstruct and use the toilet and bathroom

cannot be considered. The application is accordingly

dismissed.

Put up for final arguments on 22.07.2019. Interim

stay, if any, is extended till next date.



A.No. 793/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Vikas Kumar, counsel for appellant.

None for the respondent.

Status report not filed. Record also not produced.

Dy. Commissioner concerned is directed to appear in

person alongwith record and status report.

Put up on 17.07.2019. Interim stay, if any, is

extended till next date.



A.No. 701/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for

MCD/applicant alongwith Sh. N.R. Meena, AE(B).

File taken up today as an application is moved by the

respondent with the title for intimation regarding orders

passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi pertaining to flat

No.9722, C-9, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi with the prayer to

allow the SDMC to take the demolition action in the suit

property as department has fixed program for 04.12.2018

for taking demolition/sealing action against the unauthorized

construction at the suit flat.

It is stated in the application that this Tribunal has

passed the order dated 28.09.2018 on the appeal of the flat

owner directing the respondent to maintain status quo in

respect of the property of the appellant bearing No.9722, C-

9, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi till next date of hearing i.e.

10.12.2018.

It is further stated that the Hon’ble High Court in Writ

Petition Civil No.3819/17 titled as Masooda Mir and Anr vs

SDMC vide order dated 18.09.2018 has directed the SDMC

to file a status / action taken report within the period of two

weeks. The matter is listed before the High Court on

06.12.2018.

I have heard ld. counsel for respondent

MCD/applicant and AE(B) and carefully examined the

record as well as order dated 28.09.2018.

The present appeal was filed on 25.09.2018 against

the demolition order dated 02.06.2016 alongwith application

seeking condonation of delay.

Notice of the said application and the appeal was

issued to the respondent for 27.09.2018.

On 27.09.2018, respondent’s AE(B) Sh. N.R. Meena

appeared but did not file the status report, however, original

record was produced. The matter was adjourned on

28.09.2018 for filing the status report and arguments on the

interim stay application.

A.No. 701/18 -2-

On 28.09.2018, status report was filed but reply to

the application u/s 5 of the Limitation Act was not filed.

The matter was listed at 2.00 p.m. for filing reply to

the said application.

At 2.00 p.m. reply to the application u/s 5 of the

Limitation Act was filed.

The matter could not be heard at length with regard

to stay application as well as application seeking

condonation of delay because the undersigned had to go to

attend the crimination of Sh. Anand Swaroop Aggarwal,

sitting DJS Officer who expired on the said date.

Accordingly the matter was adjourned for arguments on the

application seeking condonation of delay as well as stay

application on 16.10.2018. The respondent was directed to

maintain status quo. The said order is reproduced as

under:-

“In the meantime respondent is directed to

maintain status quo in respect of the property of the

appellant bearing flat No.9722, C-9, Vasant Kunj,

New Delhi till next date of hearing.

However, this order is subject to any order

passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble

High Court / Hon’ble NGT about sealing and

demolition in respect of the property in question.”

Thus it is evident from the order dated 28.08.2018

that status quo order passed by this Tribunal on 28.09.2018

is subject to any order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme

Court / Hon’ble High Court / Hon’ble NGT with regard to the

sealing and demolition of the property in question.

In the application presented today the respondent

has made a prayer to allow the SDMC to take the demolition

action in the suit property.

A.No. 701/18 -3-

Since the status quo order was already made subject

to any direction / order passed by the Hon’ble High Court,

where was the occasion and need of filing present

application? Moreover, there is no explanation as to why

this application has been moved just two days before the

filing of the action taken report before the Hon’ble High

Court on 06.12.2018 despite the fact that the directions of

the Hon’ble High Court is within the knowledge of the

respondent on 28.09.2018 when the status quo order was

passed by this Tribunal.

In the circumstances mentioned in the order itself,

moving of this application with the prayer stated above is

abuse of process of law and wastage of time of this

Tribunal.

It seems that the respondent has deliberately moved

the application just two days prior to the date of hearing

before the Hon’ble High Court notwithstanding the fact that

there was no restriction upon the respondent / its officer to

execute the order of the Hon’ble High Court with regard to

sealing/demolition of the property subject matter of the

present appeal. The application being frivolous is dismissed

subject to cost of Rs.20,000/- to be deposited by the

respondent by next date of hearing.

Put up on date already fixed i.e. 10.12.2018. Copy of

order be given dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 875/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.

This is an appeal instituted u/s 343 (2) of the DMC

demolition order dated 26.11.2018 wherein the property has

been booked in continuation of the previous booking for

unauthorized construction in the shape of addition/alteration

at, ground floor, first floor, second floor and third floor.

I have heard the ld. counsel with regard to interim

stay application, who submits that photographs placed on

record shows that building is old and the appellant was just

putting up the tiles / chipping of plaster and fixing tiles.

The appellant has filed photocopy of the chain

documents. The appellant has purchased the property vide

two registered separate sale deed on 10.02.2018 wherein

ground floor is purchased separately and entire first floor,

second floor and third floor were purchased separately.

In the said sale deed lower ground floor and ground

floor is mentioned. Vendor has stated to have purchased

the entire ground floor without roof/terrace rights vide

registered sale deed on 13.12.1996. In the sale deed dated

10.04.2018 regarding first floor to third floor the vendor has

stated that he is absolute rightful owner in respect of entire

first floor, second floor and third floor.

The appellant has filed assessment order dated

18.01.2018 to show to show that a notice u/s 123D of the

DMC Act was issued on 15.06.2017 on account of non –

filing of PTRs from 2004-05 to 2016-17. The annual value

has been determined to Rs.90,180/- w.e.f 01.04.2004. No

dues certificate dated 21.02.2018 is also placed on record

and one time conversion charges Rs.6,20,789/- has been

deposited on 26.10.2018 under self assessment scheme.

Ld. counsel has therefore, prayed that property

needs to be protected as there is no unauthorized

construction / alleged addition, alteration. It is further stated

that appellant is not aware of any previous booking of the

property in question.

A.No. 875/18

In these circumstances, it is as fit case for grant of

ex-parte interim stay. Accordingly, respondent is restrained

from taking any coercive action in the property of the

appellant bearing no. 11650, Gali No.1, Sat Nagar, Karol

Bagh, New Delhi in pursuance of demolition order dated

26.11.2018 till next date of hearing.

However, this order is subject to any order passed by

the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court / Hon’ble

NGT about sealing and demolition in respect of the property

in question.

Appellant is directed to file affidavit giving details of

construction with measurements of the existing construction

alongwith existing site plan and photographs of the property

in question within five working days, failing which stay order

granted shall deemed to be vacated.

Copy of the affidavit will be provided to concerned

AE(B) by the appellant, who shall verify whether details of

construction mentioned in the affidavit is correct or not.

Appellant is also directed not to carry out any

addition, alteration, repair or construction and shall also not

create any third party interest in the property in question.

Issue notice of the appeal and application to the

respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer. AE(B) is

directed to appear in person alongwith entire record of the

proceedings, status report and reply of the appeal on date

fixed. Record be deposited immediately in the Tribunal.

Put up this matter on 22.02.2018.

Record pertaining to the previous booking be also

produced alongwith original record. AE(B) concerned to

remain present on date fixed. Copy of order be given dasti,

as prayed.



A.No. 862/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Deepak Thakur, counsel for appellant.

This is an appeal against demolition order dated

22.06.2018. Application for condonation of delay has also

been filed.

Issue notice of the appeal and application for

condonation of delay to the respondent through concerned

Chief Law Officer. AE(B) is directed to appear in person

alongwith entire record of the proceedings, status report and

reply of the appeal on date fixed. Record be deposited

immediately in the Tribunal.

Put up this matter on 12.12.2018. Notice be given

Dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 861/18 04.12.2018




been filed.








Dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 860/18 04.12.2018




been filed.








Dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 863/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Ishant, counsel for appellant.

This is an appeal against sealing of the premises on

06.08.2018. Sealing order not filed on the ground that same

is not supplied despite moving an application. Copy of the

application placed at page No.10B.

No application seeking condonation of delay has

been filed.

On filing the said application, issue notice of the

appeal and application to the respondent through concerned





The respondent shall also clarify whether the

property in question is a part of properties i.e. 21960

Industrial Units having been closed in compliance of the

order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 31.10.2018.

Put up this matter on 22.02.2019.



A.No. 390/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. S. Pathak, counsel for appellant.

File taken up today as an application u/s 151 has

been moved for stay of the demolition order dated

14.05.2018. with the prayer to restrain the respondent to

carry out further demolition action.

The matter is listed on 15.01.2019. There is no

request for preponement of the matter. Moreover, in the

order dated 31.07.2018, it is mentioned that appellant

sought adjournment for final arguments and did not press

the interim stay application and the matter is adjourned to

30.10.2018.

No status report was filed and the Dy. Commissioner

concerned was directed to appear in person to file status

report under his/her signature.

In the meantime an application under order 1 Rule 10

CPC was also filed by one intervener.

In view of these facts, as there is no application for

preponement and without hearing the respondent in this

matter, the prayer in the application cannot be considered.

Let notice of this application be issued to the

respondent for date fixed i.e. 15.01.2019.

Notice be issued Dasti.



A.No. A.No. 153/18 Statement of Sh. Ravinder Singh, AE(B), South Zone, SDMC

ON SA

The show cause notice dated 13.12.2017 as well as demolition

order dated 26.12.2017 in respect of the appeal property bearing Farm

No.5, village Mandi opposite JRD Janak Verma’s Darpan, Bhati, New

Delhi was issued by me and the same bears my signature at point ‘A’ and

‘B’ respectively.

The service of the show cause notice dated 13.12.2017 was

affected by way of pasting on 18.12.2017. The photograph of the pasting

placed at page 3A/C is a department record which might have been

placed on record after 21.05.2018 but not by me. The photograph 3A/C

was with the Office Incharge, Building South Zone Sh. Rajiv. It might

have been placed on record either by the said Rajiv or JE(B) Arun Rawat.

The status report dated 26.03.2018 filed on 22.05.2018 has been

prepared by me and the same bears my signature at point ‘C’. The said

status report also bears the signature of the then JE(B) which is at point

‘D’. The local inquiry so made by me and the then JE(B) was made from

the residents of the nearby vicinity including chowkidar of the adjacent

house, however, I do not remember their name and parentage.

The above statement is true and correct as per my knowledge as

well as on the basis of the available record.

RO&AC


A.No. 616/17 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Rakesh Walia, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Original record produced.

No status report filed.

Adjournment sought to withdraw the appeal by the

appellant or final arguments.

Put up this matter for that purpose and final

arguments on 09.07.2019.



A.No. 732/16 & 1215/15 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Gaurav Jain, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Manjusha Jha / Sh. Nitesh Sharma,

counsel for MCD alongwith Sh. Ajay Chandra

Upredi, JE(B).

Ld. counsel for appellant submitted that in appeal no.

732/16, the appellant needs to seek two weeks time to file

fresh application seeking regularization of transmission pole

and in appeal no. 1215/15, they have already applied vide

application dated 11.08.2018.

Fresh application be filed by the appellant within two

weeks, failing which they will be burdened with the costs of

Rs. 20,000/-

Status report be filed by the respondent with regard

to the application in appeal no. 1215/15.

Put up this matter for filing of status report by the

respondent and arguments on 03.07.2019.



A.No. 153/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Sanjay Agnihotri, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Ravinder Singh, AE(B) and Ms.

Renu Soni, Nodal Officer for SDMC.

Statement of Sh. Ravinder Singh, AE(B) regarding

the photographs of pasting placed at page no. 3A/C and

status report dated 26.03.2018 has been recorded.

Ld. counsel for respondent seeks adjournment to

produce Office Incharge Sh. Rajiv and JE(B) Sh. Arun

Rawat for their statement.

Put up this matter for that purpose and further

proceedings on 10.12.2018.



A.No. 1014/13, 1015/13, 1016/13 & 473/13 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant in all

appeals except appeal no. 473/13.

None for appellant in appeal no. 473/13.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta / Sh. V.K. Aggarwal,

counsel for MCD alongwith Sh. P.K. Chauhan,

AE(B) and Sh. Nitesh Kumar, JE(B).

Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for DDA alongwith

Ms. Anju Sharma, JLO from DDA and Sh.

Vijender Singh, AE(RPD-7), DDA.

Sh. Himanshu Harbola, counsel for Monitoring

Committee.

On 13.08.2018, MCD and DDA both were asked to

clarify whether they intend to take any action as no status

quo order has been passed by the Hon’ble High Court

because it was revealed that owners of 14 properties were

obtained order from Hon’ble High Court and accordingly on

23.01.2018, the respondent were directed to file the status

report regarding remaining properties which was either not

sealed or there was no stay from the Hon’ble High Court.

In that regard in para no. 5 of status report filed by

the MCD today, it is stated that the MCD has received two

subsequent references from Monitoring Committee and as

well as STF for carrying out resealing action in respect of

the remaining properties.

It is further stated that a reference bearing no. I-1632

dated 31.05.2018 regarding resealing of the remaining

premises have been forwarded to DDA for fixing a program

and North DMC shall extend necessary assistance as

required.

The sealing program of DDA is still awaited in

accordance of reference of Monitoring Committee.

In the end of status report, it is stated that there is no

role of North DMC in fixing resealing of the remaining

properties in question which fall under the jurisdiction of

DDA.

A.No. 1014/13, 1015/13, 1016/13 & 473/13

Concerned Dy. Commissioner is directed to appear

in person.

Sh. Vijender Singh, AE(RPD-7), DDA is present and

file status report in compliance of order dated 13.08.2018.

It is stated that on the directions of DLM-1/DDA a

joint program of North DMC, DDA, Delhi Police was

organized to seal the commercial properties of Sanjay

Nagar Market, Mangolpur Kalan, on 05.05.2018. The action

could not be taken due to gathering of crowd.

The matter of Sanjay Nagar Market sealing was

taken up in the fourteenth meeting of STF chaired by

VC/DDA on 02.11.2018 and it was decided that the issue of

sealing of unauthorized structures on Sanjay Nagar Market

raised by Monitoring Committee in its 127th Report

submitted to the Hon’ble Supreme Court was discussed and

it was decided that a joint operation of North DMC, DDA and

Delhi Police, after the festival season of Deepawali will be

taken for sealing of those properties and it is further stated

that the sealing programme shall be executed as soon as

the confirmation of availability of police force.

Sh. Vijender Singh, AE submits that tentatively

program is fixed for 18.12.2018.

Put up this matter for filing action taken report and

further proceedings on 08.02.2019.

Copy of order be given Dasti to both parties for

compliance.



A.No. 139/12 & 555/12 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. A.K. Trivedi, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for MCD in appeal

No.139/12.

Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD in appeal

No. 555/12.

Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for DDA in appeal

no. 139/12 alongwith Ms. Anju Sharma, JLO

from DDA.

Sh. Kanwar Singh, Kanungo from DDA.

Sh. Subhash Chand Gupta, Naib Tehsildar

from DDA.

Part arguments heard.

Put up this matter for remaining arguments on

05.12.2018 at 2.00 pm.



A.No. 136/15, 173/16 & 163/17 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. K.B. Gupta, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD.

Sh. Anupam Sharma, counsel for DDA

alongwith Ms. Anju Sharma, Nodal Officer

from DDA in appeal no. 163/17.


Respondent MCD and DDA have not filed written

brief submissions.

Both are directed to file the same within three days.


11.12.2018 at 2.00 pm.



A.No. 952/13 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. K.B. Gupta, counsel for appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.

Ms. Manorama Masih, counsel for Monitoring

Committee.

Status report filed stating that there exist four number

of dwelling units and this property and there exist three

number of shops at this property.



15.01.2019.



A.No. 176/15 & 149/15 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Atul Pandey, proxy counsel for appellant.

Sh. Rajiv Garg, Nodal Officer for North DMC.

Adjournment sought as main counsel for appellant is

not available.

Put up this matter for final arguments on 16.07.2019.



A.No. 501/13, 903/13 & 906/13 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Sumit Rana, counsel for appellant in

appeal no. 501/13.

Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant in

appeal no. 903/13 & 904/13.


None for Monitoring Committee.

Status report in compliance of order dated

06.02.2018 not filed.

Adjournment sought to file the status report clarifying

whether the conversion charges mentioned in the status

report filed on 06.02.2018 has been paid or not. Advance

copy be supplied to counsel for appellant.





Misc No. 318/18 04.12.2018

Present : None for appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, proxy counsel for MCD.


21.08.2018 has not been filed.

Ld. counsel for respondent seeks adjournment to file

the status report stating that on previous date he was not

present and could not intimate the department of producing

the status report.

Put up this matter for compliance report of order

dated 21.08.2018 under the hand and signature of Dy.

Commissioner concerned on 15.02.2019.



A.No. 367/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. M.K. Bhardwaj, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ranjit Pandey, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. N.K. Meena, ALO.

Costs of Rs. 5,000/- was not deposited by the

respondent.

Copy of status report filed on previous date supplied

to counsel for appellant.

Ld. counsel for appellant seeks adjournment to file

objections to the status report if any.

Put up this matter for deposit of costs / consideration

of status report and arguments on 13.03.2019.



A.No. 369/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Varun Dhingra, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Abdul Haq, JLO.

Owner has been impleaded as respondent no. 3 has

been served through his brother namely Dharamveer on

28.11.2018.

No one is present on behalf of owner.

No documents of ownership are placed on record by

the appellant who is claiming himself to be the owner.

Adjournment sought to address arguments on

maintainability.

Put up this matter for further proceedings and

arguments on 15.01.2019.



A.No. 1201/15 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. S.S. Handa, counsel for appellant.

None for respondent.

Appellant has expired on 25.09.2018. Death

certificate of appellant filed by Legal representative of the

appellant.

Let the notice of the application be served / issued to

both the respondent.

Appellant is directed to clarify the details of Legal

Heirs / Legal Representatives of the deceased appellant

because the application is moved by Sh. Prem Chawla, son

of deceased appellant, claiming himself to be the only Legal

Representative on the basis of Will.

Put up this matter for reply / arguments on the

application on 30.01.2019.



A.No. 723/17 & 724/17 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Fauzan Abbasi, proxy counsel for

appellant.


Adjournment sought as main counsel for appellant is

not available.

Put up this matter for final arguments on

maintainability of appeal on 23.07.2019.



A.No. 602/14 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Anmol Singh, proxy counsel for appellant

alongwith appellant.

Sh. Anupam Sharma, counsel for DDA

alongwith Ms. Anju Sharma, JLO from DDA.

Sh. Satya Pal Singh Bhola and Sh. Surinder

Pal Singh Bhola in person.

Both the appellants are present today.

Ld. counsel for appellant has filed written

submissions. Copy supplied.

Put up this matter for filing written submissions by the

respondent / hearing of oral arguments on 11.07.2019.



A.No. 317/18 04.12.2018


Ms. Meenu, proxy counsel for Ms. Nazma

Akhtar, counsel for MCD alongwith Sh. Abdul

Haq, JLO.

Status report filed stating that sealing order was

executed on 20.11.2018 by sealing at two points at ground

floor. Demolition order was passed on 04.05.2018.

Demolition action was taken on 18.06.2018 and roof slab of

second floor was demolished.

Since no one has appeared on behalf of the

appellant, the appeal is dismissed in default and for non-

prosecution.


pursuance of impugned order challenged herein. For that

purpose, the property be desealed as per the convenience

of officers of MCD.

File be consigned to record room.

Respondent is directed to file action taken report /

status report on 02.07.2019. Registrar is directed to

prepare a miscellaneous file for this purpose.



A.No. 978/17 04.12.2018

Present : Appellant in person.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD.


14.08.2018 filed informing about the penalty / misuse

charges amounting to Rs. 69,489/- which has been

deposited by the appellant vide G-8 receipt dated

14.03.2018.

Adjournment sought to file the documents of

ownership.

Arguments heard.

Ownership documents be filed by the appellant within

a week.

Put up this matter for clarification, if any / orders on

19.12.2018.



A.No. 835/16 & 930/16 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Deepanshu Choithani, counsel for

appellant.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Sh. Vijay Rajora, counsel for DDA alongwith

Ms. Anju Sharma, JLO from DDA.

Reply to the objections filed by the appellant on the

status report filed by Town Planning Department, EDMC.

Copy supplied.

Put up this matter for arguments on 24.05.2019.



A.No. 143/17 & 98/17 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. G.R. Verma, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Praveen Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Ld. counsel for respondent stated that affidavit was

received recently and send to the Zone and seeks

adjournment to file the status report.





A.No. 837/18 04.12.2018

Present : Sh. Manak Bhudhiraja, counsel for appellant

alongwith appellant.

Affidavit filed stating that the appellant has placed the

order dated 19.11.2018 before Dy. Commissioner, Keshav

Puram Zone with the application dated 20.11.2018 which

was received in the Office of Dy. Commissioner on

20.11.2018 but the copy of sealing order was not supplied.

Notice be issued to the Dy. Commissioner concerned

to appear in person for explanation as to why he has not

complied the order dated 19.11.2018. Copy of affidavit of

the appellant be sent to Dy. Commissioner alongwith notice

for 10.01.2019.

Notice be sent through Sh. Rajiv Garg, Nodal Officer

for North DMC personally.

Copy of order as well as notice be given Dasti for

compliance.



A.No. 641/17, 642/17, 643/17, 786/17, 787/17, 788/17, 789/17 & 790/17 04.12.2018


Sh. Dharamvir Gupta / Sh. Adil Husain, proxy

counsel for Sh. Umesh Gupta, counsel for

MCD.

None has appeared on behalf of the appellant

despite repeated calls.

No one is appearing on behalf of the appellant for the

last two dates.

The appeal is dismissed in default and for non-

prosecution.


pursuance of impugned order challenged herein.

File be consigned to record room.

Respondent is directed to file action taken report /

status report on 04.07.2019. Registrar is directed to

prepare a miscellaneous file for this purpose.



A.No. 258/18 Status report filed. Original record has...

Documents

Transcript of A.No. 258/18 Status report filed. Original record has...