Pooja Tokas v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents to demolish the illegal construction, as raised by respondent no. 4 over property bearing Plot No. 109, Mandir Wali Gali, near old Canara Bank, Munirka Village, New Delhi.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has handed over copy of a complaint dated 17th September, 2025 made to the Station House Officer (“SHO”), Police Station-Kishangarh, along with photographs, which are taken on record.

3. The photographs taken on 17th September, 2025 show that the unauthorized construction in the property in question, is still being carried out.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in the garb of the status quo order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 13586/2025, the respondent no. 4 herein, is continuing with the unauthorized construction.

5. This Court notes that a Show Cause Notice dated 13th June, 2025 has been issued with respect to unauthorized construction in the shape of fifth floor in the property in question. The Show Cause Notice dated 13th June, 2025, is reproduced as under:

6. This Court further takes note of the fact that a Demolition Order dated 08th August, 2025 has also been passed by the MCD, with regard to unauthorized construction of fifth floor of the property in question, which is also identified as property No. 80-E. The Demolition Order dated 08th August, 2025, issued by the Assistant Engineer, Building Department-I, South Zone, MCD, is reproduced as under:

7. This Court notes that the respondent no. 4 herein had earlier filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) 13586/2025, wherein, vide order dated 04th September, 2025, limited protection had been granted to the respondent no. 4/petitioner therein, on account of the fact that an appeal had been filed by the respondent no. 4 before the Appellate Tribunal MCD (“ATMCD”). Since, currently there is no Presiding Officer in the ATMCD, this Court had granted limited protection till the appeal of the respondent no. 4 herein, was heard by the ATMCD.

8. However, in the garb of any status quo order passed by this Court, the respondent no. 4 herein cannot take the advantage of the situation and carry out further unauthorized construction.

9. The photographs, as handed over to this Court, are reproduced as under:

10. This Court takes note of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 3, i.e., SHO, Police Station-Kishangarh, that unauthorized construction was found to be going on in the property in question and the tools were seized.

11. Learned counsel appearing for the SHO, Police Station Kishangarh, has handed over a copy of the Status Report dated 18th September, 2025, which is taken on record.

12. The said Status Report reads as under:

13. Perusal of the Status Report filed by the SHO, Police Station- Kishangarh, clearly shows that labour activity was noticed at the premises and the concerned staff instructed the parties present at the spot to immediately stop the work. Further, the police also repeatedly cautioned the respondent no.4 from carrying out further construction.

14. Considering the aforesaid, it is clear that the respondent no. 4 herein, i.e., Vijay Tokas, has misused the protection granted by this Court vide order dated 04th September, 2025 in W.P.(C) 13586/2025, in the petition where the respondent no. 4 herein, was the petitioner.

15. Accordingly, this Court recalls the interim protection granted to the respondent no. 4 herein, i.e., Vijay Tokas.