Manjeet Singh v. The Commissioner, Mcd

$~3 (Appellate Side) *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 14751/2025 & CM APPL.

81584/2025, CM APPL.

20603/2026 MANJEET SINGH .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sharavan Dev Ji and Mr. Kamal Jindal, Advocate Mob: 9818369860 versus THE COMMISSIONER, MCD & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Bharat Malhotra and Ms. Gayatri Bhatia, Advocates for MCD Mob: 8447151507 Email: bharatmal2@gmail.com Mr. Rakesh Kumar and Mr. Akhil Khan, Advs., for applicant in CM APPL. 20603/2026 M: 9910280608 Email: rksharma54@gmail.com Ms. Urvi Mohan, Adv. for R-GNCTD Mob: 7718992441 Email:

chambersurvimohan@gmail.com Mr. Sharique Hussain, Advocate for BSES Mob: 9540535859

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

O R D E R

% 20.04.2026 CM APPL. 81584/2025 & CM APPL. 20603/2026 1.

The present applications have been filed on behalf of the applicant claiming himself to be the owner of the property in question, i.e., Property The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

bearing No. B-63, Khasra No.174, Paryavaran Complex, Saidulajab, New Delhi-110030.

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the present application has been filed for recalling of the order dated 23rd September, 2025 passed by this Court, wherein, directions had been issued to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi ("MCD") to carry out action against the unauthorized construction.

3.

As per the applicant, the applicant is the owner of the property in question and that the petitioner has wrongly filed the present petition showing himself to be the owner of the said property. 4.

Learned counsel appearing for the MCD has drawn the attention of this Court to the Status Report/Action Taken Report dated 11th April, 2026, wherein, part action has already been taken by the MCD against the unauthorized existing for the property in question. 5.

Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner asserts that the petitioner is the owner of the property in question and that the petitioner has also filed a suit for partition with respect to the property in question. 6.

Considering the submissions made before this Court, it is noted that since there are disputes as regards the title and ownership of the property in question, the Court in the present writ proceedings cannot adjudicate the disputed questions as regards thereto.

7.

Accordingly, the issue with regard to title and ownership is kept open, to be adjudicated and decided in appropriate proceedings. 8.

This Court takes note that part action has already been taken by the MCD.

9.

Accordingly, considering the submissions made before this Court and The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

in view of the dispute raised before this Court, it is directed that the MCD shall not take further action against the property in question, till hearing is granted to the applicant as well as the petitioner in the present writ petition. 10.

The applicant and the petitioner shall be duly given hearing by the MCD and a speaking order shall be passed by the MCD with regard thereto. 11.

In case, any party is aggrieved by any speaking order passed by the MCD, they are at liberty to seek remedies, in accordance with law. 12.

With the aforesaid directions, the present applications are accordingly disposed of.

MINI PUSHKARNA, J APRIL 20, 2026 ak The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.