Ms Anu Chakrabarty v. Municipal Corporation Of Delhi And ANR.

$~33 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) No. 1270/2019 MS ANU CHAKRABARTY ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. B. Mahapatra, Adv.

versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr.

Harsha Peechara, Standing Counsel for SDMC with Ms. Vidhi Jain, Ms. Gauri Singh & Ms. Kriti Singh, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI

O R D E R

% 06.02.2019 CM APPL. No. 5688/2019 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) No. 1270/2019 & CM APPL. No. 5687/2019 (for interim relief) The petitioner admits that her property contains certain deviations from the standard sanctioned plan of DDA; but states that such deviations, or some parts thereof, are compoundable with the permission of respondent No. 1/SDMC. The grievance is that the application for compounding made by the petitioner is not being decided by respondent No.1. Issue notice.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 1/SDMC appears on advance copy and accepts notice. He says that his instructions are that no application

by the petitioner seeking compounding of deviation is pending with respondent No. 1.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that the application referred to in the petition was filed way back in 2004 (and not in 2006 as inadvertently mentioned in para 1 of the petition). A copy of the compounding application has also not been filed along with the petition.

Be that as it may, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 states that if an application for compounding is received from the petitioner, respondent No. 1 will consider the same in accordance with law and take a decision thereupon within four weeks of such application being made. This is acceptable to counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from the petitioner, who is present in court.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of, giving liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application seeking compounding of deviations in the subject property; with a further direction to respondent No. 1 that upon receipt of such application, the same may be considered and decided in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks of receiving such application. The decision of such application shall be communicated in writing to the petitioner within one week of taking the decision. The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J.

FEBRUARY 06, 2019/uj