Sukhdev Vihar Welfare Association v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

1. This public interest, litigation has been preferred with the following prayers:- "a) Issue an appropriate writ/orders/direction including a writ ofmandamus directing the respondentNo.I to ■ 2 not to open Zonal Transport Office on the land allotted to DTC for Bus Depot in the vicinity of Sukhdev Vihar residential colony:and b) Issue appropriate writ/orders/directions to the respondent No.5 to take action against the respondent No.l and 2for raising the unauthorized W.P.(C)No.9438/2015 PageI of13 2019:DHC:7723-DB construction on the land of DTC Depot, near Sukhdev Vihar residentialcolony;and c) Issue appropriate directions to the respondent No.4 not to allow any activity on Sukhdev Vihar Bus Depot other thanfor which the land was allotted to respondentNo.3;and d) Pass suchfurther order as this Hon'ble court may deemfit and proper in thefacts and circumstances ofthe case." (emphasissupplied)

2. Thus, shifting of Regional Transport Office at Sukhdev Vihar area has given birth to this Public Interest Litigation. This petitioner does not wantshifting ofRTO Office,nearby his residence.

3. Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that an affidavit dated 10.03.2016 filed by the Delhi Development Authority respondent no.4, reveals the factThat the Regional Transport Office (hereinafter referred to as::''RTd''),,cannot be constructed by the respondent nos.l & 2 afThe-',Delhi^ Corporation Depot Campus, situated at Suldidev Viharj New Delhi. Counsel appearing for the petitioners has also relied upon a reply to Right to Information Act, filed by the concerned respondept^aiithority which is at page 42 ofthe paper book, which reveals that permission of Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) has not been obtained for the construction of "RTO"by the respondent nos.l & 2. Thus,it is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that permission ofthe Delhi Transport Corporationrespondent no.3 is required for construction of "RTO" by the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi-respondent nos.l &2,which has not been obtained so far. W.P.(C)No.9438/2015 Page2of13

4. It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that as per Section 12 read with Section 13 ofthe Delhi Development Act, 1957,the construction of"RTO"by the respondent nos.l &2 at DTC Depot Campus, Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi is not permissible in the eyes oflaw. Counsel for the petitioners has also relied upon an order passed by this Court on 18.02.2009 in WP(C)No.5466/2008 titled as '"'Sukhdev Vihar Welfare Association Vs. GNCTD". Furthermore,it is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that as per the affidavit filed by South Delhi Municipal Corporation-respondent no.5 dated 18.01.2016, part of the construction so far done by the respondent nos.l & 2 of the "RTQ" at Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus, Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi is unauthorised, and therefore the said property has been sealed by the South Delhi Municipal Corporation.;

5. Counsel for the,petiti6nerk has:also taken to this Court to the various annexures oftheiafTidayifjfdedrby the South Delhi Municipal Corporation-respondent no'.[5] and lihs- submitted that no steps have been taken by the respondent nos.l & 2 for regularization of the construction and hence respondent nos.l;& 2cannot continue with the construction of the "RTO" at Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus,Sukhdev Vihar,New Delhi. Therefore, respondent nos.[1] & 2 may be permanently restrained from executing any construction at "RTO" at Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus, Sukhdev Vihar,New Delhi.

6. We have heard counsel appearing for respondent nos.l & 2- Govemment of National Capital Territory of Delhi, who has W.P.(C)No.9438/2015 Page3of13 submitted that the construction of the "RTO" at Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus. Sukhdev Vihar. New Delhi,is extremely important in public interest. It is further submitted by counsel for the respondent nos.l & 2 that initially "RTO" was situated at Sheikh Sarai, New Delhi. Looking to the public need and as per the policy decision taken by the respondent nos.l &2,the same is required to be shifted attwo different places viz.- (a) Vasant Vihar,New Delhi. (b) Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus, Sukhdev Vihar,New Delhi.,

7. Furthermore,it is submitted by counsel for the respondentnos.[1] & 2- Government ofNCT ofDelhithat due to the stay granted by this Court vide order dated 14.03.2016, the "RTO" has been started at Sarai Kale Khan,New Delhi butrespondent nos.l &2are also having a big Depot Campus ofDelhi Transport Corporation-respondent no.3 at Sukhdev Vihar,New Delhiand respondent nos.l &2 wants to start the"RTO"within the Depot Ckmpuko Transport Corporation in accordance with Master Plan for Delhi, 2021 and in accordance with the building by-laws of the concerned Corporation viz. South Delhi Municipal Corporation-respondent no.5. It is also submitted by counsel for the respondent nos.l & 2-Govemment ofNCT of Delhi that this litigation at the behest ofthese petitioners, is not tenable in law as the will and wish ofthe petitioners cannot stand against the public need and against the policy decision of the concerned respondentauthorities. In fact,these petitioners are staying withinthe "gated colonv" at Sukhdev Vihar,New Delhi and in nearby there is a W.P.(C)No.9438/20I[5] Page4of13 separate existing Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus and in that Depot Campus, which is belonging to the respondent no.3, respondent nos.l &2-Govt.ofNCT ofDelhi wants to start"RTO".

8. It is submitted by counsel for the Govt. of NCT of Delhi that Delhi Transport Corporation-respondent no.3 has no objection to allow the respondent nos.l & 2, to start "RTO" within their Depot Campus. Hence,the petitioners cannot be wiser than the original owner-respondent no.3 within who's Depot Campus,the "RTO" is to be started by the respondent nos.l & 2. Substantial public interest and need lies in favour of the respondent nos.l, 2 and 3. The petitioners cannot decide individually, singly and as per their whims and caprice as to where the"RTO"is to be started by the respondent nos.l & 2. In fact, this falls withiri the ambit of sovereign function and authority of the respondent nos.1, 2 & 3 and hence individual interest should be given a go-by against the interest ofthe public at large. Hence,this petition may not be entertained by this Court., The owner of the Delhi Trarispdrt-Cdi^b Depot Campus is the respondent no.3 where the"RTO" is to be started by the respondent nos.l & 2 and hence at the,highest DTC-respondent no.3 can take objection against the same and not any other person like the petitioners,that too,in a so called public interest litigation and hence also this writ petition may not be entertained by this Court.

9. We have also heard the counsel appearing for the Delhi Transport Corporation-respondent no.3. Counsel appearing for the A DelhiTransportCorporationvehementlysubmittedthattheyarethe actual owner ofthe Depot Campus where"RTO" is to be started by fV.P.fCJ No.9438/2015 Page5of13 the respondent nos.l & 2. They are capable enough to protect their right,title and interest in the property in question. It is also submitted by counsel for the respondent no.3 that initially in this writ petition, an affidavit was filed by them on 02.03.2017 and on the basis of paragraph 2 thereof, it is submitted that the construction of the "RTO" is in consonance with the Master Plan for Delhi - 2021. The provisions of the Master Plan have been pointed out in paragraph-2 in the said affidavit ofDelhi Transport Authority who is the owner of the Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus where "RTO"is to be started by the respondent nos.l &2. It is submitted by counsel for respondent no.3 that if the respondent nos.l & 2 wants to start their "RTO" within the Depot Campus of respondent no.3, they have no obiection at all whatsoever. Such type of construction of"RTO"is absolutelyIn accordance with the provisions of Delhi Development Act,.19^7 to be read with Master Plan for Delhi 2021. This aspect-(yfthe to been highlighted in their affidavit dated 02.03.26l7filed'm:tHt^^^^ petition.

10. Looking to the affidavit dated 02.03.2017 filed by the respondent no.3 and the submissions; made by the counsel for the respondent no.3, it seems that the owner of the Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus has no objection ifthe"RTO"is started by the respondentnos.l &2in the DepotCampus ofrespondentno.3. Hence,the petitioners cannot be wiser then the actual owner ofthe Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus. Moreover, the respondentno.3 is quite capable to protect its right and hencethere is no need ofthese petitioners to file such type ofpetition much less a W.P.(C)No.9438/2015 Page6of13 u\ mn public interest litigation.

11. We have also heard the counsel appearing for the Delhi Development Authority-respondent no.4 who has submitted that they have no objection if the respondent nos.l & 2 are constructing the "RTO" within the Depot Campus of the DTC situated at Sukhdev

12. It is further submitted by counsel for the DDA-respondent no.4 that earlier an affidavit was filed by them on 10.03.2016 in this writ petition. Since said affidavit was not in accordance with the proper interpretation of provisions of the Master Plan of Delhi-2021and hence a new and corrected affidavit dated 20.02.2018 has been filed by the Delhi Development Authority-respondent no.4(Page No.153) and as per this affidavit, the constmction of the "RTO" within the Depot Campus of Delhi Transport; Corporation at Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi, is absolutely in cphsonance with the Master Plan for Delhi-2021 and Delhi Deyelopnjent;-Act, 1957. Therefore, Delhi DevelopmentAuthority has nd bbjedtion ifthe"RTO"is being shifted by the respondent nos.l & 2.within the Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus at Sukhdev Vihar,.New;Delhi. It is further submitted by the counsel for respondent no.4 that the provisions ofthe law for the said purpose has been pointed out in their second affidavit dated 20.02.2018 filed in this writ petition.

13. We have also heard the counsel appearing for the South Delhi Municipal Corporation-respondentNo.5,who hassubmittedthatifthe construction of"RTO"by the respondent Nos.l &2 within the Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus is as per the building by-laws W.P.(C)No.9438/2015 Page 7of13 and as per the building Rules, they have no objection because the construction ofthe"RTO"is to be done within the Depot Campus of Delhi Transport Corporation. The role ofthe South Delhi Municipal Corporation is only to the extent that the nature of the construction should be as per the building bye-laws and building rules applicable to the facts ofthe case. Ifthere is any slight deviation in the existing construction of the "RTO" at Delhi Transport Corporation Depot Campus Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi then the respondent nos.l & 2 can puttheir house in order- (a) either by applying for regularization of the existing construction; (b) by changing the construction so that it may fall within the four comers of building by-laws or the existing building rules;&

(c) if any exemption is allowed for the constmction of

"RTO" by the Goyernmeht then such application may be preferred by the respdrideiit itbs.l & 2 before respondent no.5 and the same will be appreciated in accordance with law,mles, regulations and Governmentpolicy,