W.P.(C)/5165/2017 of KISHORE KUMAR Vs SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR

Court: Delhi High Court
Decision date: 2017-12-19
Bench: TIS HAZARI COURTS
Case number: 5165/2017

Parties

That further as also admitted in the present writpetition, the petitioner herein also preferred a writ petitionbearing No.192/2014, titled as Kishore Kumar (PETITIONER)
In view of the status report, the petition is filed without anycause of action and is dismissed accordingly (RESPONDENT)

Cites (1)

CRL.M.C./2191/2020 of YOGENDER @ BANTY & ORS. Vs THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. & ANR. (2020)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+W.P.(C) 5165/2017

KISHORE KUMAR

..... PetitionerThroughMs. Madhu Moolchandani, Adv.versusversus

SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ANR

..... Respondents

ThroughMr. Ashok Kashyap, StandingCounsel for SDMC

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLAO R R%09.08.2017

By the petition, the petitioner seeks directions to respondentno.1 to take action under Sections 343 & 344 of the DMC Act for thealleged unauthorized construction in property bearing no. 147, SavitriNagar. In the status report, the respondent has stated, as follows :

“3.That, further upon referring to the record it has beennoticed that the subject property is already stands booked forunauthorizedconstructionvidefilebearingNo.231/B/UC/SZ/2004dated24/12/2004and50/B-I/UC/SZ/08dated 17/04/2008 u/s 343 & 344 of DMC Act 1957.Uponfollowing the due process of law the necessary demolition orderalso stands passed vide dated 07/01/2005 and 05/05/2008respectively.4.That presently in light of the Moratorium as extendedunder the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (SpecialProvisions) Second (Amendment) Act – 2014, the property inquestion is protected till 31[st]December, 2017 and as and whenthe said protection of the Moratorium is lifted the necessaryaction shall be taken with regard to the property in question,pursuant to aforementioned demolition order, in accordance

with law.

5.That further as also admitted in the present writpetition, the petitioner herein also preferred writ petitionbearing No.192/2014, titled as Kishore Kumar V/s RakeshKumar & Ors., which was disposed of by this Hon’ble HighCourt vide its order dated 16/04/2015, agreeing therein withthe submissions of the learned counselappeared for SDMCthat the property in question is currently protected under theNational Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions)Second (Amendment) Act – 2014.The copy of the order isannexed as annexure P-3 along with the writ petition.6.That, it is also relevant to state that on being aggrievedof the said order, the petitioner herein also preferred LPAbearing No.146/2016, titled as Kishore Kumar V/s RakeshKumar & Anr., which was also dismissed while holding thatthere is no infirmity or error in the impugned order. Thedetailed order in this regard is also annexed along with the writpetition, as Annexure P-4.”

In view of the status report, the petition is filed without anycause of action and is dismissed accordingly.

A. K. CHAWLA, J

AUGUST 09, 2017rc