AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
MINI PUSHKARNA, J (ORAL):
The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondent nos. 1 to 3, to stop and demolish the illegal and unauthorized construction being carried out by respondent nos. 4 and 5 upon the property bearing no. F-13/10, land measuring 200 Sq. Yds., situated at Khasra No. 192/193/203, Jogabai Extension, Okhla, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi-110025.
The present writ petition has been filed on the premise that the petitioner is the owner of the property in question and for this purpose, the petitioner has filed the revenue record of the year 1967-1968.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”), on advance notice, submits that the present petition has been filed with malafide intentions.
He submits that with respect to the same property, as the property in question in this case, another writ petition, i.e., W.P.(C) 13237/2025, titled as “Ragib Khan Versus Commissioner MCD and Ors.”, was filed, wherein, a similar plea was taken with regard to ownership of the property in question.
He further submits that as recorded in the said writ petition, the action with respect to the unauthorized construction against the property in question has already been taken. He, thus, submits that despite action having been taken by the MCD as recently as in September, 2025, the present petition has been filed, without confirming the actual facts of the status of the property in question.
This Court notes that the present writ petition has been filed on the premise that the petitioner is the owner of the property in question. Para 1 of the present writ petition is reproduced as under:
“xxx xxx xxx
1.That the present writ petition has filed by the petitioner under article 226 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ order or direction in the nature to the respondent no. 1 to 3 to stop and demolish the illegal and unauthorized construction carried by the respondent no. 4 & 5 upon/over the Property bearing no. F-13/10, land measuring 200 Sq. Yds., Situated at Khasra no. 192/193/203, Jogabai Extension, Okhla, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi-110025 (hereinafter referred as subject property), which is belonging to the petitioner as petitioner's father and grandfather was having title qua the aforesaid entire land and the name of the petitioner is also available in revenue record i.e. Virasat no. 598, Khewat no. 8/8. The present illegal and unauthorized construction and encroachment has been carried out by the respondent no. 4 & 5 over the said subject property, which is belonging to the petitioner as per revenue records and thus enforcing the fundamental rights of the petitioner guaranteed under article 14 (Equality before law:- The state shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth) and 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty:- No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law) of Constitution of India 1949. The copy of the revenue record with true typed copy is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE P-1 (Colly) xxx xxx xxx”
This Court also takes note of the judgment dated 19th September, 2025, passed by this Court, in the case of W.P.(C) 13237/2025, titled as “Ragib Khan Versus Commissioner MCD and Ors.”, which had been filed with respect to the same property and on the basis of a similar plea of ownership of the said property. The judgment dated 19th September, 2025, reads as under:
“1.The present writ petitions have been filed seeking directions to respondent nos. 1 to 5, to take action against the illegal and unauthorized construction being carried out at property bearing no. F-13/10A, Sir Syed Road, Joga Bai Extension, Near Okhla, New Delhi-110025.
2.This Court is informed that both the properties, in both the petitions are one and the same, despite the description of the property in W.P.(C) 13636/2025, being F-13/1, Khasra No. 187, located at Joga Bai Extension, Sir Syed Road, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi-110025.
3.Learned counsel appearing for Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”) draws the attention of this Court to the Status Report dated 16th September, 2025 filed on behalf of the MCD, wherein, details of the action taken by the MCD against the unauthorized construction in question, is brought forthwith. The relevant portions of the Status Report filed on behalf of the MCD, are reproduced as under:
xxx xxx xxx
3.That so as to ascertain the status of the subject property the area field staff of Building Department-I, Central Zone of MCD has inspected the same and also referred to record maintained in this office. The status of the actions as initiated/ taken against subject properties are detailed herein below:-
i.During inspection by the concerned field staff subject property has been identified as Property Opposite f-15/03, Jogabai Extension, Batla House, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi. Photographs showing the present status of the property are annexed herewith as Annexure: A.
ii.Demolition Proceedings u/s 343/344 of the DMC Act:- As per record, Property Opposite f-15/03, Jogabai Extension, Batla House, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi was initially booked u/s 343/344 of the DMC Act vide U/c file No. 242/B/UC/EE(B)-I/CNZ/2025 dated 05.06.2025 for the unauthorised construction in the shape of Ground Floor and accordingly, a Show Cause Notice u/s 344(1) and 343 of the DMC Act bearing printed No. 21297 dated 05.06.2025 was issued in the name of Owner/ Builder of the property with the directions to submit his reply within 15 days, as to why orders for demolition as required u/d 343 of the DMC Act should not be passed in respect of the unauthorised construction already carried out and the unauthorised construction, if any carried out after the issuance of present Show Cause Notice. Further the Owner/ Builder of the property was also requested to attend the personal hearing proceedings on 19.06.2025. Copy of Show Cause Notice dated 05.06.2025 is annexed herewith as Annexure: B.
iii. Work stoppage letter u/s 344(2) of the DMC Act:-
Upon noticing the aforesaid unauthorized construction, a work letter u/s 344(2) of the DMC Act bearing No. D/161/AE(B)-I/CNZ/2025 dated 11.06.2025 was sent to the SHO, PS Shaheen Bagh with the request that unauthorised construction activity be stopped by the police immediately and workmen present in the premises be removed and construction material including the tools, machinery etc involved in the execution of the work may be seized forthwith, so that no further unauthorized construction can be carried out at the site. Copy of work stoppage letter dated 11.06.2025 as sent is annexed herewith as Annexure: C.
iv.Demolition Order:- Inspite of directions issued vide
Show Cause Notice dated 05.06.2025, neither the Owner/ Builder filed his reply nor attended the hearing proceedings on 19.06.2025, accordingly after following due process of law, necessary demolition order was passed on 30.06.2025. Before passing the demolition order, so as to ascertain factual position about the property, site was inspected, which revealed in-spite of initiation of aforesaid actions, Owner/ Builder of the property has carried further unauthorised construction in the shape of First Floor and Second Floor. Accordingly, newly constructed floors i.e. First Floor and Second Floor were also added in the demolition order passed on 30.06.2025. Copy of demolition order dated 30.06.2025 is annexed herewith as Annexure: D.
v.Further unauthorized construction: During the inspection the concerned field staff on 08.08.2025, it was noticed that despite aforesaid actions, the Owner/Builder of the property has carried further unauthorized construction in the shape of Third Floor and the same has also been booked u/s 343/344 of the DMC Act vide U/c file No. 332/B/UC/EE(B)-I/CNZ/2025 dated 08.08.2025. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice u/s 344(1) & 343 of the DMC Act bearing printed No. 21438 dated 08.08.2025 of the DMC Act was also issued in the name of Owner/Builder of the property. Copy of Show Cause Notice dated 08.08.2025 is annexed herewith as Annexure: E. Besides above, allied actions as issuance of work stoppage letter u/s 344(2) of the DMC Act and DJB, BSES and Sub-Registrar for disconnection of water & electricity supply and not to register this property, under Indian Registration Act, 1908 were also taken. Copies of letters dated 12.08.2025 sent to SHO, PS Jamia Nagar, BSES, DJB & Sub-Registrar are annexed herewith as Annexure: F (Colly).
4.That, pursuant to demolition order already stand passed, this answering respondent/ MCD has taken following action against subject property:-
Sr. No. Date Action Taken 1. 13.08.2025 During the course of action, upon availability of Police Force, 04 number of RCC panels were demolished at the roof of Ground Floor and reinforcement of these RCC panels were also cut with the help of gas cutter. 2. 30.08.2025 During the course of action, upon availability of Police Force, 02 numbers of RCC panels were demolished at roof of Ground Floor, 03 number of RCC panels were demolished at roof of first floor, 02 number of RCC panels were demolished at roof of Second Floor and reinforcement of these RCC panels were also cut with the help of gas cutter. 3. 01.09.2025 During the course of action, 02 number of RCC panels were demolished on the roof of Ground Floor, 03 panels were demolished on the roof of first floor and 03 number of panels were demolished at roof of Second Floor. Total 08 number of RCC panels were demolished and their reinforcement were cut down with the help of gas cutter. 4. 02.09.2025 During the course of action, upon availability of Police Force, 07
numbers of RCC panels were demolished (03 at Ground Floor, 02 at First Floor and 02 at Second Floor). Reinforcement of these panels were also cut with the help of gas cutter. 5. 03.09.2025 During the course of action, 07 number of RCC panels were demolished (01 at Ground Floor roof, 02 at First Floor roof, 02 at Second Floor roof and 02 at Third Floor roof). Reinforcement of these panels were also cut down with the help of gas cutter. 6. 04.09.2025 During the course of action, upon availability of Police Force, 02 number of projections were demolished on Ground Floor roof, 01 brick wall was demolished at first floor, 02 number of RCC panels were demolished on third floor, 03 number of RCC panels were demolished on Second Floor roof. Reinforcement of these panels were cut down with the help of gas cutter. 7. 09.09.2025 During the course of action, upon availability of Police Force, 02 RCC panels were demolished at roof slab of fourth floor, 01, RCC panel was demolished at roof of third floor, 01 RCC panel was demolished at the roof slab of Second Floor. Reinforcement of these panels were also cut with the help of gas cutter. Photographs showing the aforesaid action, as taken by the department are annexed herewith as Annexure: G (Colly).
4.Learned counsels appearing for the MCD further submit that further action was also taken on 17th September, 2025.
5.Attention of this Court is also drawn to the photographs attached with the present Status Report, which are reproduced as under:
6.Perusal of the aforesaid Status Report clearly shows that requisite action has been taken by the MCD.
7.At this stage, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 6 in W.P.(C) 13237/2025, who is also the respondent no. 2 in W.P.(C) 13636/2025, submits that he is the owner of the property in question. He submits that the petitioner in W.P.(C) 13237/2025, stays approximately one kilometre away from the property in question, while the petitioner in W.P.(C) 13636/2025, stays approximately fifteen kilometres away from the property in question.
8.None appears for the petitioner in W.P.(C) 13237/2025, when the matter is called out.
9.Clearly, the petitioner in W.P.(C) 13237/2025, who stays away approximately one kilometre away from the property in question, has no locus to file the present writ petition. Since the petitioner is not the immediate neighbour of the property in question, the petitioner does not as such, has any locus to file the present writ petition. This Court, in the case Rajendra Motwani & Anr. Versus MCD & Ors., 2017 SCC OnLine Del 11050, has already held that in case a person is not the immediate neighbour and is not affected personally by any unauthorized construction as such, such petitions cannot be maintainable. Thus, in the case of Rajendra Motwani & Anr.(Supra), it was held as follows:
xxx xxx xxx
10....that an illegal construction in itself does not give any legal right to a neighbor. An illegal construction always no doubt gives locus standi to the local municipal authorities to seek removal of the illegal construction, but, a right of a neighbor only arises if the legal rights of light and air or any other legal right is affected by virtue of the illegal construction of the neighbour...
xxx xxx xxx”
(Emphasis Supplied)
10.Thus, this Court expects that whenever such a situation arises, where petitions are being filed by the persons, who do not have direct interest in the unauthorized construction being carried out, such status shall be brought to the notice of this Court, on the first date itself, by the counsels appearing for the Statutory Bodies.
11.This Court notes the submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.(C) 13636/2025, that the petitioner is the owner of the property in question, which is disputed by learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2, in W.P.(C) 13636/2025.
12.Without going into the issue as regards the ownership of the property in question, since requisite action has already been taken by the MCD, any further directions, in that regard are not required to be issued for the time being.
13.The MCD and Station House Officer (“SHO”), Police Station Jamia Nagar, shall ensure that any construction in the property in question, shall take place only after due Sanctioned Plan is obtained and that no further unauthorized construction takes place in the property in question.
14.With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petitions, along with the pending applications, are accordingly disposed of.”
It is to be noted that as per the Memo of Parties, the address of the petitioner is House No. 244/1, Ashoka Enclave, Sector-35, Faridabad, Haryana-121003.
On a pointed query by this Court, as to whether the petitioner has filed any suit for possession, since it is the case of the petitioner that the property in question belongs to him, the answer is in the negative.
Clearly, despite raising submission before this Court that the property in question belongs to the petitioner, there is no suit for possession filed on behalf of the petitioner. This raises doubt as regards the genuineness and bonafide of the case put forth by the petitioner.
This Court also takes note of the fact that in the aforesaid judgment dated 19th September, 2025, passed in the case of W.P.(C) 13237/2025, titled as Ragib Khan Versus Commissioner MCD and Ors., this Court has already noted the action that has already been taken by the MCD against the unauthorized construction existing in the property in question.
Clearly, the present writ petition has been filed with nefarious designs and with an ulterior motive, wherein the petitioner has filed the present petition on the basis that the property in question belongs to him. It is to be noted that despite raising such plea, the petitioner has only filed the present writ petition against unauthorized construction and no steps have been taken by the petitioner to seek possession of the property in question, which allegedly is owned by the petitioner.
This Court notes that various orders have already been passed by this Court that it is only those persons, who are directly affected by unauthorized construction and who are the immediate neighbors living in the vicinity of the property in question, are entitled to file a petition against any unauthorized construction.
Thus, it is to be seen that in order to circumvent the aforesaid constraint and limitation as imposed by the Court, a new strategy is being employed by various parties, wherein, they file petitions against the unauthorized construction on the ground that the premises where such unauthorized construction is being raised, is owned by such persons.
Such tactics and stratagem cannot be allowed to be adopted by such unscrupulous persons, who, in order to obtain unlawful gains for themselves, try to use the solemn process of this Court. This is certainly not acceptable. This Court cannot allow the process of the Court to be misused and abused in this manner.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, the present writ petition is clearly an attempt by the present petitioner to arm twist the builder of the property in question for undesirable and dishonest considerations. The Court has to deal with such people strictly who try to use the process of the Court for dishonest considerations.
Accordingly, the present writ petition, along with the pending application, is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 50,000/- payable to the Delhi High Court Bar Clerk’s Association, Account No. 15530100006282, IFSC Code: UCBA0001553, Bank Name: UCO Bank, Branch: Delhi High Court.