Azad Tempo Mahasangh v. North Delhi Municipal Corporation

1. W.P.(C)4989/2018 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ declaring the letter of allotment of parking area at Naniwala Bagh Commercial Complex dated 7.3.2018 as non est in the eyes W.P.(C)4989/2018& W.P.(C)6312/2018 Page 1 2019:DHC:7923 \ oflaw.The petitioner{hereinafter referred to as the Petitioner Sangh)c\si\m.s to be a Union of tmck/tempo owners, drivers and their staff members registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and is said to comprise hundreds of members operating from Naniwala Bagh Commercial Complex parking area admeasuring approximately 800 sq.meters. It is stated that members of the petitioner have been enjoying peaceful occupation and usage ofthe said parking area for nearly 3-4 generations. They are a group, of nearby residents engaged in earning their livelihood by plying their vehicles.

2. It is claimed that on 20.4.2018 couple ofunidentified people claiming to be the representatives ofrespondent No.2 approached the members ofthe petitioner on the pretext that respondent No.l has allotted the said site to respondent No.2.

3. The petitioners and its members were directed to vacate the area. It is stated that after some time the petitioner was able to access a copy ofthe Letter of Allotment of the parking area in question issued by respondent No.l in favour ofrespondent No.2 dated 7.3.2018.It is claimed that the said letter appears to be a false and fabricated document.

4. It is pleaded that the petitioners are bona fide residents ofthe area and are regular taxpayers.They have complied with all statutory requirements of maintaining truclUtempos. They are regularly paying parking fees to North MCD.They have also claimed that the petitioners are in adverse possession ofthe parking area for more than 30 years. Based on these submissions the afore-noted reliefis being sought.

W.PTC)6312/2018 W.P.(C)4989/2018& W.P.(C)6312/2018 Page 2 \

5. W.P.(C)6312/2018 is filed by the petitioner i.e. the Parking Contractor who has been allotted the parking site by North Delhi Municipal corporation vide allotment letter dated 7.3.2018. In this Writ Petition the said petitioner seeks a Writ ofMandamus directing respondents No.l and 2 to remove all encroachments including that of respondent No.3 from the parking site allotted to the parking contractor/petitioner.

6. I will dispose ofthe two writs by this common order.

7. Respondent No.l/North DMC has filed a reply. They have stated in the reply thatthe whole complex belongsto North DMC,exceptthe building portions, which have been constructed by Private Builders, after auction of land by erstwhile MCD,now North MCD.The parking area in question is an authorised parking area ofNorth DMC and the petitioner sangh cannot claim any right on the same. Copy of allotment letter dated 14.12.2004 has been placed on record. Respondent No.l has also placed on record a communication dated 13.5.2019 issued to parking contractor/M/s.Neo Urban in W.P.(C)4989/2018 granting further extension/renewal of authorised parking site in question w.e.f. 8.3.2019 to 7.3.2020 and the Agreement signed between North DMC and M/s. Neo Urban, the parking contractor dated 6.3.2018 is also attached with the petition.

8. I may note that this matter was substantially heard on 5.9.2019. However,the order could not be dictated as it was 1:16 PM.The matter was kept for balance proceedings/balance arguments, if any, after lunch. However,learned counsel for the petitioner Sangh who had appeared on that date did not appear when the matter was called after lunch having left a note with the Court Master stating that she had to go on account ofsome medical W.P.(C)4989/2018& W.P.(C)6312/2018 Page[3] reasons in the family. Therefore, in the interest ofjustice, the matter was adjourned fortoday. Today none has appeared for the petitioner Sangh.

9. Keeping in view the submissions made on the last date ofhearing and the pleadings of parties, it is manifest that the North DMC has allotted the area in question to the Parking contractor as an authorised parking site. The only plea of the petitioner Sangh is that they are parking in the area for generations to claim title based on adverse possession. The issue ofadverse possession cannot be adjudicated upon in a Writ Petition. In any case long possession of a property prima facie does not tantamount to adverse possession.

10. There is no meritin W.P.(C)4989/2018.Same is dismissed.

11. Later on learned counsel has entered appearance for the petitioner sangh and is apprised of the order. On her request 1 have heard learned counsel for the petitioner sangh again. She has repeated her submissions made on the last date ofhearing. However,in the interest ofjustice, liberty is granted to the petitioner sangh to make a representation to North DMC.In case,ifsuch a representation is made,the same shall be dealt with as per law by North DMC.

12. As far as W.P.(C)6312/2018 is concerned the basic grievance of the parking contractor is that the members of respondent No.3/Azad Tempo Mahasang (Regd.)/(Pet.Sangh) are blocking the ingress and egress of the parking lotthereby making it commercially unfeasible.

13. In view of the above, a direction is issued to North DMC and the Delhi Police to take steps to ensure thatthe ingress and egress ofthe parking area is not blocked by anybody. Members of Azad Tempo Mahasang are also directed to ensure that they may park their vehicles in a manner not to W.P.(C)4989/2018& W.P.(C)6312/2018 Page[4] block the ingress and egress ofthe said parking lot which is subject matter ofthe present proceedings.

14. Another issue raised in the present petition pertains to reduction ofthe license fees payable to North DMC on account ofthe alleged inability ofthe Parking Contractor to utilise the parking area in terms ofthe contract with North DMC. This issue is kept open to be adjudicated upon by the appropriate civil forum.Petition stands disposed of,as above.