- (1.) THESE writ petitions were filed before this Court, inter alia, challenging various provisions of the Delhi Laws (Special provisions) Act, 2006. Being temporary Act of Parliament, the provisions were continued from year to year by virtue of the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws ((Special Provisions) Ordinance, 2007, National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Ordinance, 2007, National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2007, National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2009, National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Act, 2009, National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2011 and National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Act, 2011 valid upto 31.12.2014. Some of the writ petitions also challenged the provisions of the Master Plan for Delhi 2021 as notified on the 7th February, 2007. Some of the Writ Petitions challenged notifications issued by the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'DDA') notifying certain streets for mixed use and/or commercial use, which were issued in the year 2006. In the matter initiated by M.C. Mehta, various facets of mining in the Aravallis, shifting of industrial units both hazardous and noxious from Delhi, closure of industrial establishments working in non -conforming areas, setting up of sewage treatment plants and common effluent treatment plants, change of land users viz., non -conforming users of residential areas, were taken up for consideration by this Court and various orders were passed thereon. This Court had passed the following order on 30.9.2002: Reply be filed with regard to commercial use of premises in residential areas within 4 weeks. Response to the same be filed within 4 weeks thereafter. List after 8 weeks. In its earlier order dated 19.8.2003, this Court had observed: In these matters various issues are involved, such as shifting of industries from non -conforming areas, setting up of CETP in the industrial areas, the change of land use, validity of proposal to regularise the non -conforming use, applicability of building bye -laws to the areas falling within Lal Dora and the impact of the guidelines issued by the Central Government on the Master Plan under preparation. The judgment with regard to the shifting of industries from residential/non -conforming areas was rendered on 7.5.2004 and is reported as M.C. Mehta v. Union of India : (2004) 6 SCC 588.
(2.) THE judgment in regard to the misuse/non -conforming use of residential premises, and power to seal premises, arising in IA No. 22, as also, several appeals filed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'MCD') which arose out of a Full Bench of the Delhi High Court were decided by a judgment dated 16.2.2006 and is reported as, M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, : (2006) 3 SCC 399. It was, inter alia, held that the MCD had power to seal the premises for non -conforming user in terms of Section 345A of the MCD Act, and various directions were issued. These cases relate to the matter of non -conforming user of premises, and the orders passed thereon, after the judgment of 16.2.2006, under the special provisions made by the Parliament qua Delhi, the various provisions of the Master Plan which according to some of the Petitioners were flawed because of the non -availability of the physical and social infrastructure. This Court had appointed a Monitoring Committee vide an order dated 24.3.2006. The same is being extracted below: In order to over -see the implementation of the law, namely sealing of offending premises in terms of the letter and spirit of this Court's directions, it is necessary to appoint a monitoring committee instead of leaving any discretion with the officers of the MCD. Accordingly, we appoint a Monitoring Committee comprising of Mr. K.J. Rao, Former Adviser to Election Commissioner, Mr. Bhure Lal, Chairman, EPCA and Maj. Genl. (Retd.) Som Jhingan. We direct that all necessary facilities shall be supplied by MCD to the members of the Monitoring Committee, including the facility of transport, secretarial service, honorarium etc. Further, orders were also passed by this Court on 24.3.2006, 11.5.2006 and 8.10.2007, which inter alia, read as under: ...The sealing shall continue notwithstanding any order passed by any court. The Delhi Police is directed to extend full support to the MCD for carrying on the operation of sealing." And ...on 24th March, 2006, it was directed that sealing shall continue notwithstanding any order passed by any court. Be that as it may, we reiterate that no court other than this Court will have any jurisdiction to make an order of de -sealing the premises sealed under the orders of this Court. IA No. 22 From the Report of the Monitoring Committee dated 5.10.2007 (Report No. 43), it appears that there is a difference in perception of MCD and DDA about sealing in special areas. While the DDA in its letter dated 10.8.2007 states that properties on notified streets for payment of conversion charges as per the mixed use Regulations prescribed in MPD 2021, such mixed use/commercial activities may not be allowed on streets which are not notified in residential areas. The MCD appears to be of the view that the Special Areas are exempted for any punitive action for a period of three years from the date of notification of the MPD -2021. A copy of the extracts of Report No. 43 (paragraphs 6 and 7) shall be supplied by the Registry to Learned Counsel for the MCD along with a copy of the letter (Annexure -B). The response of the MCD, if any, shall be filed within three weeks. If any action for sealing is being taken pursuant to and in line with this Court's order dated 24.3.2006 and 11.5.2006, the same shall be in order.
(3.) (i) In this Court's order dated 29.9.2006, while hearing the writ petitions which had been filed for challenging the notifications issued after this Court's judgment dated 16.2.2006, it was observed as under: The city of Delhi is an example of a classical case, which, for the last number of years, has been a witness of flagrant violations of municipal laws, town planning laws and norms, Master Plan and environmental laws. It is borne out from various orders and judgments passed by this Court and the Delhi High Court, whether in a case of shifting of hazardous and polluting industries or providing cleaner fuel (CNG) or encroachment of public land and streets or massive unauthorized construction and misuse of properties. It is a common knowledge that these illegal activities are also one of the main sources of corruption. In the writ petitions, this Court further ordered as below: The constitutional validity of the Notification dated 7.9.2006 is under challenge on various grounds in WPs. (C) No. 450, 464 and 470 of 2006. The challenge deserves to be examined in depth and, therefore, in these writ petitions, we issue rule. Counter -affidavit shall be filed by the Respondents within 4. weeks. The Respondents are further directed to place before this Court material which was taken into consideration for arriving at the decision leading to the amendment of the Master Plan in terms of the Notification dated 7.9.2006 and the consequential Notification dated 15.9.2006. [vide M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and Ors. : (2006) 7 SCC 456] (ii) Since there was a difference of perception with regard to sealing to be done by the Monitoring Committee (in the areas over -seen by NDMC and the DDA), this court passed another order on 7.5.2007: We have considered Report No. 34 dated 4.5.2007 of the Monitoring Committee. In para 3 of the Report, it has been stated that there are large scale commercial activities being carried on public land meant for public utility services. There appears to be difference of view as to how sealing can be carried out, in terms of the orders of this Court and whether sealing has to be done by DDA or MCD. To avoid any confusion, we direct that the Monitoring Committee shall carry on sealing in the presence of functionaries of MCD and DDA. To avoid any further confusion, which is appearing in the minds of the NDMC Authorities, we direct that the sealing shall also be carried out in the areas governed by the NDMC.;