Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 08.09.2025
AMIT CHAKRABORTY .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Parul Agarwal, Advocate Mob: 9873416566
Email: advparulgoel@gmail.com
Through: Mr. Rohit Kathuria, Advocate for MCD
Mob: 9717948948 Email: a.d.kathuria@gmail.com
Mr. Abhinav Singh, Advocate Mob: 9811188892
JUDGMENT
1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondent – Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”) to not execute the Demolition Order dated 06th December, 2022, and the Sealing Order dated 21st December, 2022, till the appeal is heard by the Appellate Tribunal MCD (“ATMCD”).
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the lawful and exclusive owner of the property no. G-1 (New No. G-1C), G Block, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092, which comprises of two plots of 100 sq. yds. each.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner was granted sanction, and permitted to construct the basement, ground floor, first floor, second floor and third floor in the property in question.
4. It is submitted that subsequently a Show Cause Notice was issued by the MCD, pursuant to which a Demolition Order dated 06th December, 2022, was issued, which was followed by a Sealing Order dated 21st December,
2022.
5. It is submitted that though the petitioner had been granted a Completion-cum-Occupancy Certificate, however, the same was revoked subsequently by the MCD on 08th April, 2025.
6. She further submits that the petitioner has already filed appeals before the ATMCD against the Demolition Order, Sealing Order, as well as against the revocation of the Completion-cum-Occupancy Certificate of the petitioner.
7. It is submitted that the next date before the ATMCD is 10th September, 2025. In view of the fact that there is no Presiding Officer in the ATMCD, the present petition has been filed, since the respondent-MCD has issued a Vacation Notice under Section 349 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (“DMC Act”), on 28th August, 2025.
8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-MCD submits that the Demolition Order was passed way back on 06th December,
2022. He further submits that sealing action has been taken by the MCD with respect to the shops existing in the property in question. However, the MCD found that the said seals were tampered time and again.
9. He submits that the building plan of the property in question had been sanctioned earlier on 23rd April, 2021 and 07th May, 2021.
10. Subsequently, unauthorized construction/deviations from basement onwards were noticed in the property in question, pursuant to which a Show Cause Notice dated 17th November, 2022, was issued. Thus, subsequently after following the due process of law, the Demolition Order was passed on 19th December, 2022.
11. It is noted that as per as per the Demolition Order on record, the date of the said order is 6th December, 2022, however, as per the Status Report of MCD, the date of Demolition Order is 19th December, 2022. Nevertheless, pursuant to the Demolition Order, further action was taken on behalf of the MCD.
12. Learned counsel for the respondent-MCD submits that subsequently, a Sealing Show Cause Notice was issued on 14th December, 2022, and a Sealing Order dated 21st December, 2022, was passed.
13. Thereafter, sealing action was taken by the department in the property in question on 11th January, 2023, and the property in question was sealed at 03 points at the basement, 14 points at the ground floor and one point at the staircase at the entrance of the ground floor, in the presence of police from the Police Station Laxmi Nagar, Delhi.
14. It is submitted that subsequently, the petitioner herein filed an appeal, i.e., Appeal No. 24/2023 before the ATMCD against the Demolition Order. However, the said appeal was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 20th September, 2023.
15. It is submitted that demolition action was taken against the unauthorized construction in the property in question on 19th December, 2023, wherein, one RCC panel was cut down and two walls were punctured. Further, sealing action was also taken at the third floor and the ground floor of the property in question at 12 points.
16. However, subsequently when the property in question was inspected on 03rd September, 2024, it was found that the seal had been tampered by the petitioner herein, which led to lodging of an FIR by the MCD against the petitioner.
17. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent further submits that the Vacation Notice dated 04th September, 2024 under Section 349 of the DMC Act, has been served upon the petitioner earlier, with the direction to vacate the property in question within 24 hours.
18. It is submitted that action was again taken on 11th September, 2024, wherein 08 shops at the ground floor of the property in question were sealed at 11 points.
19. Further action was also taken on 25th September, 2024, wherein, shops in the basement at 03 points, and 03 shops at the ground floor at 03 points were re-sealed in the presence of the police.
20. It is submitted that sealing action was also taken on 20th March, 2025, wherein, 03 shops in the basement were re-sealed at 03 points, and 08 shops at the ground floor were re-sealed at 11 points.
21. It is submitted that considering the unauthorized construction and the tampering of the seal by the petitioner time and again, the department revoked the Completion-cum-Occupancy Certificate on 08th April, 2025, after following the due process of law.
22. It is submitted that further action is also required to be taken against the property in question.
23. Having heard learned counsels appearing for the parties, this Court notes the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the MCD.
24. Learned counsel appearing for the MCD has handed over a copy of the Status Report, which is taken on record.
25. The relevant portions of the Status Report, are reproduced as under: “xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx”
26. Considering the fact that in the present case, the Demolition Order was passed way back in the year 2022, and the Sealing Order was also passed way back in the year 2022, and actions have been taken time and again, against the property of the petitioner, this Court finds no reason to grant any interim relief in favour of the petitioner.
27. Considering the aforesaid, no merit is found in the present petition, and the same is accordingly dismissed. MINI PUSHKARNA, J SEPTEMBER 8, 2025