High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/12015/2016

Kaushalya Sharma v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & ORS.

2017-03-09Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Indermeet Kaur2 pages

$~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 12015/2016 KAUSHALYA SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Rajeshwer K. Gupta, Advocate with Ms.

Sonia Khandelwal, Advocate versus SOUTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

..... Respondents Through Mr. Deepak, Advocate for R-1 Mr. Pankaj Sinha and Ms. Richa Singh, Advocates for R-2 Mr. Girish Sharma, for R-3

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 09.03.2017 CM APPL No. 47417/2016 (Exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. Application disposed of.

W.P.(C) 12015/2016 and CM APPL No. 47416/2016 (stay) Status report of the respondent / SDMC is on record. In this status report it is stated that the property in question (60 and 60A, Basant Village, New Delhi) was inspected. Unauthorized construction in the shape of four rooms, one toilet and a partition wall on the ground floor (2 rooms of tin shade roof and 2 rooms of Agra stone roof) have been booked on 20.02.2017. Show cause notice of the same date had also been issued. Work

stop notice has been issued on 01.03.2017 with a request to stop the unauthorized construction forthwith; this has been sent to the local SHO. Letters of disconnection of essential supplies i.e. water and electricity has also been sent to the concerned authorities. In this status report it is stated that all actions which have been initiated shall be taken to its ultimate goal. This statement of respondent no. 1/ SDMC is taken on record. It is hoped and expected that this commitment shall be honoured in true letter and spirit. Respondents no. 3 to 7 have also been served. They are represented. Their submission is that the petitioner is not an owner of the property as has been averred by her. It is pointed out that a partition decree has been passed interse respondents no.

3 to 9 besides other co-owners where the petitioner is not a party. It is stated that an application seeking regularization of the deviations, if any shall be filed by the respondents before the Competent Authority. Needless to state that on such an application being filed, the SDMC / respondent no.1 shall answer the same in accordance with law. The submission of the respondent that the petitioner has raised certain illegal constructions in the afore noted property which does not belong to her shall also be considered by the respondent.

No further orders are called for on this petition. It is disposed of. INDERMEET KAUR, J MARCH 09, 2017 gb