Kulsum Bi v. Municipal Corporation Of Delhi & ORS.

$~5 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 7842/2024 & CM APPL. 32456/2024 KULSUM BI .....Petitioner Through:

Ms. Sana Ansari and Mr. I. Ahmed, Advocates Mob: 9818053386 versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through:

Mr.

Abhinav Sharma and Mr.

Mahender Shukla, Advocates for MCD Mob: 9717227945 Email: mahendershukla8@gmail.com

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

O R D E R

% 12.09.2025 1.

The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondent nos. 1 to 3, to take action against the unauthorized construction at property bearing No. 1773, Ward No. XI, situated at Kucha Dakhni Rai, Daryaganj, Delhi-110006.

2.

When the present matter was listed on 25th August, 2025, this Court had noted as follows:

"1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondent nos. 1 to 3, to take legal action against the illegal encroachment at property bearing No. 1773, Ward No. XI, situated at Kucha Dakhni Rai, Daryaganj, Delhi-110006.

2. Learned counsel for respondent-Municipal Corporation of Delhi ("MCD") has handed over copy of the letter dated 12th June, 2025 to submit that construction in the property in question already stands regularized. The same is taken on record.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

3. In light of the aforesaid, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has the liberty to challenge the regularization of the property carried out by the MCD, if the petitioner is so aggrieved.

4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the main counsel is not available, on account of some personal difficulty.

5. Accordingly, re-notify on 02nd September, 2025." (Emphasis Supplied) 3.

The letter of regularization dated 12th June, 2025, as handed over by the learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1-Municipal Corporation of Delhi ("MCD"), is reproduced as under:

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

4.

Perusal of the aforesaid shows that the property in question has been regularized by the Office of the Executive Engineer (B)-II, City-S.P. Zone. 5.

At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that dispute as regards the title of the property in question is pending between the petitioner and Ms. Raisa, from whom the respondent nos. 4 and 5 claim to have purchased the property in question.

6.

If that be the case, it is clarified that this Court has not given any finding on the right, title and interest of the property in question. 7.

It is further clarified that merely on account of the fact that the construction in the property in question has been regularized, the same shall confer no special equity on respondent nos. 4 and 5, and would have no bearing on the title dispute, which is pending with respect to the property in question.

8.

Needless to state, in case, the petitioner is aggrieved by the regularization of the property in question, the petitioner is at liberty to seek her remedies, in accordance with law.

9.

Noting the aforesaid, the present writ petition, along with the pending application, is disposed of.

MINI PUSHKARNA, J SEPTEMBER 12, 2025 ak The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.