$~5 *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % W.P.(C)No.9944/2016 and CM No.39525/2016 Date of decision :
13. h September, 2017 BALBIR SINGH SAINI ........ Petitioner
Through : Mr. Umesh Mishra, Adv. versus ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF INDIA AND ORS ...... RESPONDENTS
Through : Mr. Vijay Joshi, Senior Standing Govt. Counsel with Mr. Prasanta Varma, Adv. for UOI/R-1. Mr. Roshan Lal Goel, Standing Counsel for R-2 with Ms. Anju Gupta, Adv. Mr. Harsh Vardhan and Ms. Manishika, Advs. for R-4 to 6. CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT (ORAL) GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE1 This writ petition has been filed complaining illegal and unauthorized construction in the property bearing No.75, Masjid Moth Village, New Delhi in violation of not only the provisions of the Delhi W.P.(C)No.9944/2016 Page 1 of 3 Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 but also of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
2. The counter affidavit has been filed by the South Delhi Municipal Corporation submitting that the property bearing No.76, Masjid Moth Village, New Delhi stood booked for unauthorized construction by a notice dated 9th August, 2010 and a demolition order was passed. Pursuant thereto, demolition action was taken on “01/09/2010 at its ongoing stage and demolished columns at Ground floor”. Despite this action in 2010, the counter affidavit of the SDMC refers to demolition orders passed in 2016 with regard to the construction from the ground floor to fourth floor. The photographs have been placed by the SDMC on record showing token demolitions. In a status report dated 19th April, 2017, it is stated that on 27th March, 2017 also, certain demolition has been effected.
3. The counter affidavit of the SDMC would show that despite notices issued in 2010, four storey building has not only been permitted but has been continuing and the SDMC is propounding untenable excuses for not completing the demolition action pursuant to its own demolition notices. Such construction could not have taken place without connivance of the officials of the SDMC. Even the fact that the demolition has not been completed would suggest complicity with the persons who have carried out the illegal construction. This is even more serious given the fact that the said construction is restricted under Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
4. An assurance is given by Mr. Roshan Lal Goel, ld. Standing W.P.(C)No.9944/2016 Page 2 of 3 Counsel for the respondent no.2 SDMC that the demolition of the entire structure shall be completed at the earliest. Let the same be complete within a period of two months from today and a report be filed in this court thereafter with advance copy to the petitioner.
5. This writ petition and application are disposed of in the above terms.
6. It is made clear that if the action in terms of the notices and orders of the SDMC, as noted above, is not carried out, stringent action shall be taken against the person responsible for the same. Dasti. SEPTEMBER13 2017 aj ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR, J W.P.(C)No.9944/2016 Page 3 of 3