Home » SC verdict allowed ‘free for all’ unauthorised building in Delhi: MC | India News

SC verdict allowed ‘free for all’ unauthorised building in Delhi: MC | India News

by newsking24

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court appointed Monitoring Committee (MC) on Thursday gave a hard-hitting report severely criticising the SC’s August 14 judgment clipping its wings and its implementation has led to massive scale desealing of premises that had been sealed for unauthorised residential building and creation of a ‘free for all’ ambiance within the Capital.
“Delhi is witnessing frantic activity of desealing of sealed properties having unauthorised construction, encroachment, misuse and such allied illegal activities by the Local Bodies. In fact, all work so far undertaken by the MC in pursuance to the orders of the C till date is being undone. All these actions have naturally created an undesirable atmosphere of ‘free for all’ and has eroded the confidence of the law abiding citizens in complying with the rules and regulations with respect to all building activities,” the MC mentioned.
The SC-appointed committee comprising Bhure Lal, Okay J Rao and S P Jhingon mentioned, “all actions of the MC to restore the confidence of the public in the rule of law, have come to a naught and Delhi is going back to the pre-2006 days wherein, adherence to the laid down rules and regulations has been given a complete goby. MC is a mere bystander to all these irregularities being perpetuated with impunity as the SC in its recent orders has questioned and negated almost all actions taken by the MC with respect to the sealing of offending premises/properties.”
Appearing for Union city growth ministry and Delhi Development Authority (DDA), solicitor normal Tushar Mehta took robust exception to the Bhure Lal headed MC sniping on the SC judgment. “The SC had set up the MC for checking illegal use of residential properties for commercial use. The MC did good work for sometime but later unilaterally expanded its powers and started sealing properties on the ground that its plan was not approved. The SC’s August 14 judgment was given by a three-judge bench after lengthy hearing and considering all documents. Now a three-member body of private persons comes to the court and says SC is wrong,” he mentioned.
For the municipal companies, senior advocate Sanjiv Sen supported the SG and mentioned that the SC had in its August 14 judgment had clearly laid down that the MC had energy solely to examine misuse of residential properties for business functions.
A bench comprising Chief Justice S A Bobde, A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian sought the opinion of amicus curiae and senior advocate Ranjit Kumar, who has repeatedly assisted the courtroom within the matter for over twenty years. Kumar mentioned that the report wants consideration within the gentle of the August 14 judgment. Kumar additionally sought to be relieved from the arduous job of amicus curiae. On his request, the SC appointed senior advocate Guru Krishna Kumar as amicus.
The MC in its report mentioned, after the August 14 judgment “even properties sealed as per the orders of the MC are being desealed at will by the local bodies south/east/north Delhi Municipal Corporations/New Delhi Municipal Council without any reference to the MC, as ordered by the SC on August 27.”
On August 14, a three-judge SC bench had mentioned, “It is apparent from the various orders passed by this Court from time to time and from the various reports of the MC that it was never authorized by this Court to take action against the residential premises that were not being used for commercial purposes. It was appointed only to check the misuse of residential properties for commercial purposes. After that, this Court directed that the MC should also look into the matter of ‘encroachment on the public land and ‘unauthorized colonies’ that have come up on the public land and were wholly unauthorized without sanction. At no point in time, this Court had empowered the MC to act vis­à­vis to the purely residential premises.”
The bench had castigated the MC for exceeding its temporary and mentioned, “It would not be appropriate to the MC to usurp statutory powers and act beyond authority conferred upon it by the Court. The MC could not have sealed the residential premises, which were not misused for the commercial purpose, as done vide Report No.149, nor it could have directed the demolition of those residential properties.”

Source hyperlink

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Select Language »
%d bloggers like this: