Sh. Prafulla Kumar Barik v. MCD and Anr

Delhi High Court · 03 Apr 2013 · 2013:DHC:7687
G. S. Sistani
W.P.(C) 2078/2013
2013:DHC:7687
administrative appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court held that a writ petition challenging rejection of regularization application is not maintainable when an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal is available, but granted interim protection against coercive action pending disposal of the appeal.

Full Text
Translation output
$-45.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 2078/2013
SH. PRAFULLA KUMAR BARIK Petitioner
Through : Mr.T.K. Ganju, Sr. Adv. with Mr.Rono
Mohanty and jvir.Naiin Talwar, Advs.
VERSUS
MCD AND ANR Respondents.
Through : Mr.Neeraj Kumar, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTAN6
03.04=2013 CSV! 3945/2Q13
ORDER

1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application stands disposed of, W.P.(C) 2Q78/2013 & CM 3944/2013.

3. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondents to regularize the portion of the petitioner as applied for regularization with the respondents being under the ambit of Municipal Bye- Laws/policies and Master Plan 2021. The petitioner further seeks a direction to the respondents to accept the compounding fees in respect of the portion of the property of the petitioner, which is to be regularized. A direction is also sought to carry out a survey to know the quantum of unauthorized additions and alterations, which is carried out in other flats of the petitioner's colony so as to avoid action against the petitioner in isolation.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 28.12.2012 passed by respondent no.2 whereby the regularization application of the petitioner has been rejected. 2013:DHC:7687

5. Learned counsel for respondents enter appearance on an advance copy and has raised a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of this writ petition on the ground that an equally efficacious remedy by filing an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, MCD, as provided under the Act, is available to the petitioner.

6. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to approach the Appellate Tribunal, MCD, by filing an appeal, however, he prays that in the meanwhile, respondents should be directed not to take any coercive action against the petitioner. Counsel for respondent has no objection to the same.

7. Accordingly, present writ petition and application stand disposed of with the following agreed directions:

(i) The petitioner shall approach the Appellate Tribunal,

(ii) No coercive action will be taken by the respondents against the property of the petitioner being SFS Category built up Flat bearing no.46-D, Pocket-H, First Floor and Second Floor (Duplex), situated at Malviya Nagar Extension, Saket, New Delhi for a period of four weeks from today to enable the petitioner to file the appeal and seek protection from the Tribunal.

(iii) The Tribunal shall dispose of the appeal in accordance with law.

8. Let a copy of this order be given DASTI to counsel for the parties under the signature of Court Master. G.S.SiSTASSSi, J APRIL 03, 2013 msr