REGAL TRADERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioners have thrown a challenge to the Lt. Governor's order of demolition and sealing of the premises dated 12th January, 1989 affirming the orders of demolition of the Appellate Tribunal dated 29-6-1988 and of Zonal Engineer (B) of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi dated 23-10-1987 as also the orders for sealing of the premises of the Appellate Tribunal dated 29th June, 1988 and of the Deputy Commissioner (L) dated 3/8th September, 1987, and have prayed for quashing of the same. They have also prayed for as writ of mandamus restraining the respondents Delhi and others. from demolishing the building on plot No. 411 1 2 2 situated in Lal Dora (Firni or extended abadi) of village Mundka. in the Union Territory of Delhi and to unseal the premises

(2.) The relevant facts which emerge from the pleadings are that the petitioners have raised some construction on plot No. 411 1 2 2, Village Mundka, Delhi, which according to them, falls in Lal Dora (Firni or extended abadi) and of which they are the owners. The Municipal Corporation, Delhi having found that some construction has been raised on I he plot in dispute, initially issued a show cause notice for demolition dated 30-12-1986 and thereafter a revised show cause notice for dated 20-1-1987 to the petitioners. Having received no satisfactory reply, the demolition notice dated 17-2-1987 was issued and served on the petitioners. Another show cause noties for demolition dated 31-3-1987 was also issued for the additional construction to the petitioners. Thereafter another demolition notice I order dated 9-4-1987 was issued and served on the petitioners. Having felt aggrieved agains' the notice order of demolition, the petitioners preferred a civil writ petition No. 1737186 a direction was given by this court to pass fresh orders after hearing the petitioners. After having complied' with the court's order and considered the matter, the Zonal Engineer (Bldg.) on 23-10-1987 ordered for demolition of the building by the Corporation under Section 343(1) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It appears, in the meantime the Deputy Commissioner(L) also passed an order for sealing of the premises (Ann. P-15) and it was directed that no person shall remove the seal except under the orders of the Deputy Commissioner (L) or as provided under Section 445-A(3) of the Act. Having felt aggrieved against these orders of demolition and sealing of the premises. the petitioners filed appeals belore the Appellate Tribunal which were dismissed on 29th June, 1988 by two separate orders upholding the sealing and demolition of the premises. The petitioners thereafter filed appeals before the Lt. Governor Delhi against the orders of the Appellate Tribunal which were also dismissed by a commoa older dated 12-3-1989 there upholding the order of scaling and demolition of the construction raised on the land. Against these orders of sealing and demolition the petitioners have filed the present writ pettiion.

(3.) The case set up by the petitioner in this writ petition as well as before Lt. Governor and other authorities concerned is that the laud of the property in question is. situated within the Lal Dora of Firni or abadi of the village as extended during the consolidation operation of village Mundka during 1975-76 under the provisions of Delhi Land Reforms Act read with the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation & Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 and that by virtue of 'notification No. RNZ11731 dated 24-8-1963 issued by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi under Section 507(b) (i) of the Act, it is exempted from building regulations provided in Sections 332-336 and 342 and 347 of the Act and as such the construction raised is not unauthorised. On the other hand the respondents have submitted that no doubt the above notification exempted certain rural areas lying within the village abadi from the provisions of Sections 332-336 etc. but does not exempt the petitioners from applicability of provisions of Sections 312 and 313 of the Act and as such construction raised in contravention of Sections 312 and 313 of the Act is unauthorised and requires demolition. Further the are in dispute does not fall, on facts, in the extended abadi and therefore the sanction under Section 332 and 333 of the Act for construction of the house will also' be required.