Dr. M.L. Arora Vs. Delhi Development Authority and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
the petitioner sought quashing of notices, which were issued against him on the ground that the petitioner had violated the provisions of the master plan since he was using the premises for running a nursing home - the premises were stated to be used for residential purposes - the court ruled that delhi development authority was competent to make regulations with the prior approval of the central government to set down terms and conditions on which such land use was permissible - further, whenever such regulations would be enforced, they would have their effect and the same would not effect the invalidity of the impugned notice. - ordersanjay kishan kaul, j.1. the petitioner has sought quashing of the impugned notices dated 22.8.1979 as also the earlier notice dated 29.6.1976 issued by the respondent dda taking action under section 14 read with section 29(2) of the dda act on account of violation of the provisions of the master plan by the petitioner since the petitioner was using the premises for running a nursing home. the premises are stated to be meant for residential use. 2. learned counsel for the petitioner states that the matter in controversy stand settled in view of the judgment of the division bench of this court in dma nursing home & medical e.f. v. union of india : air2001 delhi471 , and it is open to the petitioner to run the nursing home. this position is not disputed by learned counsel for respondent no. 1 -- dda though the counsel contends that in terms of para 23 of the said judgment, it has been held that under section 57-1(f) of the act, dda is competent to make regulations with the prior approval of the central government to set down the terms and conditions on which such land use is permissible. learned counsel states that the regulations have been framed and sent for approval to the central government. 3. be that as it may, as and when the regulations come into force, they will have their effect. it would not in any manner effect the invalidity of the impugned notice. 4. in view of the aforesaid the impugned notices and proceedings there under are quashed and the writ petition stands disposed of leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

Judgment:
ORDER

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.

1. The petitioner has sought quashing of the impugned notices dated 22.8.1979 as also the earlier notice dated 29.6.1976 issued by the respondent DDA taking action under Section 14 read with Section 29(2) of the DDA Act on account of violation of the provisions of the master plan by the petitioner since the petitioner was using the premises for running a nursing home. The premises are stated to be meant for residential use.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the matter in controversy stand settled in view of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in DMA Nursing Home & Medical E.F. v. Union of India : AIR2001 Delhi471 , and it is open to the petitioner to run the nursing home. This position is not disputed by learned Counsel for respondent No. 1 -- DDA though the Counsel contends that in terms of para 23 of the said judgment, it has been held that under Section 57-1(f) of the Act, DDA is competent to make regulations with the prior approval of the Central Government to set down the terms and conditions on which such land use is permissible. Learned Counsel states that the Regulations have been framed and sent for approval to the Central Government.

3. Be that as it may, as and when the Regulations come into force, they will have their effect. It would not in any manner effect the invalidity of the impugned notice.

4. In view of the aforesaid the impugned notices and proceedings there under are quashed and the writ petition stands disposed of leaving the parties to bear their own costs.