a.no. 805/18 05.04.2019 respondent has already filed...

A.No. 805/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. S.K. Verma, counsel for appellant

alongwith appellant.

Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.

Respondent has already filed written submissions.

Appellant may also file written submissions within two

weeks.

Put up this matter for that purpose and arguments on

29.05.2019.

(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.

Appellate Tribunal:MCD 05.04.2019

A.No. 876/18 & 877/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Amit Vohra, counsel for appellant


Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Written submissions be filed by both parties.

Put up this matter for that purpose and final

arguments on 16.05.2019.



A.No. 286/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Puran Chand, counsel for appellant.


Status report filed. Copy supplied.

Appellant may deposit the misuse charges or file

objections, if any.

Put up this matter for final arguments on 24.07.2019.



A.No. 143/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. A.K. Singh, counsel for appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.

Status report not filed.

Put up this matter for filing status report by the

respondent in pursuance of previous order and arguments

on 07.08.2019.



A.No. 508/16, 509/16, 514/16 & 1129/15 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Gaurav Jain, counsel for appellant.

Sh. K.K. Arora / Sh. Sanjay Sethi / Sh. S.K.

Pruthi, counsel for MCD alongwith Sh.

Praveen Deolia, AE(B).

Status report filed stating that regularization

application has not been filed by the appellant till date.

Ld counsel for appellant moved an application for

issuance of notice to Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).

Address is mentioned in the application.

Let the notice of this application be issued to the IRP

for 07.08.2019.



A.No. 416/16 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Ramnish Khanna, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Praveen Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Status report filed stating that permission has been

granted vide sanction / permission letter dated 08.01.2019.

Ld. counsel for appellant submitted that in view of the

sanction of tower / transmission pole in question, the sealing

order needs to be quashed.

I have also heard counsel for respondent who

submits that since the permission has been granted, the

tower / transmission pole has been regularized and the

Tribunal may pass the appropriated orders accordingly.

In view of the submissions made at bar and the

permission having been granted to the appellant vide letter

dated 08.01.2019, the impugned sealing order stands

quashed after fulfillment of the terms and conditions of

sanction letter by the appellant.

Respondent may deseal the tower in question. The

appeal is disposed of accordingly in above terms.

The file of the department, if any, be returned to the

respondent alongwith copy of this order.

File be consigned to record room.



A.No. 310/18 05.04.2019

Present : None for appellant.

Sh. Raj Bhushan, Nodal Officer from EDMC.

None has appeared on behalf of the appellant.

Put up this matter for filing action taken report / status

report by the respondent as there is no stay and arguments

on 31.07.2019.



A.No. 35/19 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Keshav, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ranjit Pandey, counsel for MCD.

Structure stability certificate dated 16.02.2019 with

site plan filed alongwith settlement agreement dated

25.04.2010 executed before Delhi High Court Mediation

Centre by the appellant. Copy supplied.

Status report by the respondent was filed on previous

date. At the very outset, Ld. counsel for respondent

submitted that on previous date, status report was not filed

but the original record was produced.


respondent and final arguments on 09.07.2019.



A.No. 242/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Vishrud Raj, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Jatin Sabharwal, counsel for MCD.

It is stated by counsel for respondent that costs will

be deposited within one week.

Status report signed on 21.02.2019 placed on record.

The same was received to the counsel for respondent on

previous date but he could not appear, due to some

personal difficulty.

Copy of said status report supplied to the appellant.

It is stated that entire construction of fourth floor and

fifth floor was newly constructed at that time of booking of

the property.

At the time of inspection carried out by the JE(B),

three masson (mistri) and four labours were found working.

Ground floor to third floor of the property has been shown

old and occupied in the booking itself.




A.No. 1181/15 05.04.2019

Present : Appellant in person.

Sh. Raj Bhushan, Nodal Officer from EDMC

alongwith Sh. R.K. Jain, AE(B).

Status report filed stating that property was inspected

on 11.03.2019 at 3.00 pm alongwith the appellant and it was

noticed that the second floor and third floor of the property

has been demolished completely.

However, projections on stilt, ground floor and first

floor on municipal lane have not been demolished

completely as is evident from the photographs.

Open area of shaft which was sanctioned 4.70 sq.

mtrs has been reduced to 1.08 sq. mtrs.

AE(B) states that the said area is compoundable.

Appellant may take necessary steps to bring the

property within compoundable limits.

Put up this matter for filing further status report by the

respondent and arguments on 25.07.2019.

Copy of order be given Dasti to both parties for

compliance.



A.No. 933/18, 934/18, 935/18, 936/18, 937/18 & 938/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Ranjit Pandey, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. Ravinder, AE(B).

Status report filed stating that the respondent has

taken necessary punitive actions against the unauthorized

construction in the property under reference as the property

in question was booked thrice vide file no. (1) 534/UC/B-

II/SZ/2017 dated 16.10.2017; (2) 624/UC/B-II/SZ/2017

dated 07.12.2017 & (3) 26/UC/B-II/SZ/2018 dated

12.01.2018 on the ground of unauthorized construction, for

action under the DMC Act, 1957. Further action is under

contemplation and will be taken in due course of time as per

policy of the department.

As per record service of show cause notices issued

u/s 343/344 of the DMC Act, the same was pasted at site.

However, no proof of service by pasting is available on

record. As per record sealing show cause notice were also

not served upon the appellant.

As regards regularization of the property, the

applicant submitted an application for the same, which is

under process. With regard to explanation of the concerned

officials, show cause notices have already been issued to

them.

It is clear from the status report that various circulars

of the Commissioners have not been followed by the AE(B)

and JE(B) and photographs of pasting of show cause notice

was necessary to be taken before carrying out the

demolition proceedings and the sealing show cause notice

was also not served upon the appellant.

Once it is an admitted case of the respondent that

these procedures are not properly followed, the

Commissioner concerned is directed to take action against

the AE(B) and JE(B) for not following the circulars dated

15.04.2010 and 06.12.2016.

A.No. 933/18, 934/18, 935/18, 936/18, 937/18 & 938/18

No status report has been filed after approval of the

Commissioner as sought to be filed today in compliance of

order dated 17.01.2019.

It is further stated that regularization application of

the appellants are under process. Commissioner, SDMC is

directed to file action taken report in compliance of order

dated 17.01.2019 and further action to be taken against the

AE(B) and AE(B) for non-compliance of circulars of

Commissioner regarding service by way of pasting.

Put up this matter for arguments on interim stay

application as well as final arguments on 24.05.2019.



A.No. 99/19, 100/19, 101/19, 102/19, 103/19 & 104/19 05.04.2019


Sh. Aabhar Jain, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. Ravinder, AE(B).

Adjournment sought to file status report.

Put up this matter alongwith connected appeals

bearing nos. 933/18, 934/18, 935/18, 936/18, 937/18 &

938/18 for filing status report by the respondent and




A.No. 722/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. V.K. Arora, counsel for appellant.

Sh. K.K. Arora, counsel for MCD.

Final arguments heard.

Ld. counsel seeks adjournment to place on record

the proof of deposit of house tax regarding extra coverage

in the premises.

Let the same be filed by next date of hearing.

Put up this matter for clarifications, if any / orders on

23.04.2019.



A.No. 552/18 05.04.2019

Present : Ms. Anusuya Chaudhary, counsel for

appellant alongwith appellant.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Ashish Sharma, AE(B).

Status report filed stating that penalty charges has

been calculated to the tune of Rs. 80,703/-.

Appellant may either deposit the same of file

objections to the same, if any.


04.07.2019.



A.No. 168/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Amzad Khan, proxy counsel for Sh.

Kameshwar Mishra, counsel for appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. Ashok Kumar, L.I. Civil Lines Zone.

Original record produced. Let the same be deposited

with the Registrar of this Tribunal.

AE(B) made a statement that the property in question

is situated in non conforming area and has been sealed on

the ground of misuse. The appellant has deposited misuse

charges amounting to Rs.46,165/- vide G-8 receipt

No.74179 dated 21.01.2019. The property does not come

under the 21960 industrial units in which Commissioner,

MCD filed the affidavit before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in

M.C.Mehta vs UOI Writ Petition (C) No. 4677/1985. The

property can only be used for residential purpose only. His

statement has been recorded separately in this regard.

Arguments heard.

Put up for order /clarification, if any on 23.04.2019.



A.No. 194/19 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. G.R. Verma, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Preetish Sabharwal, counsel for

respondent.

Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.

Status report not filed. It is stated that original record

is attached in appeal file No.699/17 Ashok Sood vs. MCD.

On perusal of the said original record attached with

appeal No.699/17, it is found that the property bearing

No.23B & 23C, DDA Flats Pkt-B, East of Kailash was

booked for unauthorized construction by way of extending of

room at first and second floor with projection over existing

Ground floor (garage) by the occupant of flat No.23B and

23C, DDA Flat. Show cause notice dated 10.08.2015

placed at page NO.11/C was issued. Owner / builder

shown to have been served by way of pasting at site. No

photograph of pasting has been placed on record.

Thereafter demolition order was passed on 18.08.2015 on

the ground that no reply was received.

Ld. counsel for respondent at the very outset pointed

out that the appeal has been filed on 02.08.2017 against the

order dated 18.08.2015, the same is barred by limitation.

He further pointed out that the impugned property was

sealed on 16.02.2017, as such knowledge of the demolition

order can be imputed from the said date even if there is

deficiency in service.

It is stated that application u/s 5 of the Limitation has

been filed which needs to be heard before passing any

interim order.

Adjournment sought to file reply of the said

application.

It is stated by the ld. counsel for appellant since the

property is lying sealed and till the appeal is decided on

merits the property needs to be protected from demolition.

A.No. 194/19 -2-

In these circumstances, since the application seeking

condonation of delay is to be disposed off, the respondent

shall maintain status quo in the property in question and will

not carry out any demolition action in pursuance of the

demolition order dated 18.08.2015 till next date of hearing.

However, this order is subject to any order passed by

the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court / Hon’ble

NGT about sealing and demolition in respect of the property

in question.

Appellant is directed to file affidavit giving details of

construction with measurements of the existing construction

alongwith existing site plan and photographs of the property

in question within five working days, failing which stay order

granted shall deemed to be vacated.

Copy of the affidavit will be provided to concerned

AE(B) by the appellant, who shall verify whether details of

construction mentioned in the affidavit is correct or not.

Appellant is also directed not to carry out any

addition, alteration, repair or construction and shall also not

create any third party interest in the property in question.

Put up this matter for filing reply of the application

seeking condonation of delay, status report, filing of the

proof of taking photographs regarding service of the show

cause notice upon the appellant and arguments on the

application as well as main appeal on of status report,

record by the respondent on 26.07.2019.

Copy of the order be given Dasti to counsel for

appellant, as prayed.



A.No. 699/17 & 652/18 05.04.2019

Present : Ms. Chavi Sood counsel for appellant in

appeal No.699/17.

Sh. G.R. Verma, counsel for appellant in

appeal No.65/18.

Ms. Nagina Jain, counsel for MCD / Sh. V.K.

Aggarwal, proxy counsel for Manpreet Kaur,

counsel for respondent.

Put up alongwith connected appeal bearing

No.194/19 on 26.07.2019.



A.No. 115/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. A.K. Singh, counsel for appellant

alongwith Sh. Manish Kumar Singh, AR of the

appellant company.

Sh. Shivendu Gaur, counsel for respondent.

Status report filed stating the representative of the

company informed that the tower could not be dismantled

due to their dispute with the owner and they were not

allowed to be entered in the property.

AR of the appellant company made a statement that

appellant company wants to withdraw the present appeal

as the company could not dismantle the tower in question

due to dispute with the owner of the property who did not

allow entry for the purpose of dismantling and he requested

to waive the cost imposed vide order dated 10.12.2018.

His statement has been recorded separately in this regard.

In view of the statement made by the AR of the

company the present appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Cost imposed upon previous date is waived. The impugned

order is confirmed. Respondent is at liberty to take action

as per law and file the status report.

The file of the department, if any, be returned to the

respondent alongwith copy of this order. File be consigned

to record room.

Registrar is directed to prepare a miscellaneous for

the purpose of action taken report to be filed by the

respondent and put up on 07.08.2019.



A.No. 868/17 05.04.2019

Present : Appellant in person.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.

Adjournment sought by the appellant as advocate is

not available.




A.No. 765/16 05.04.2019


Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD.

Sh. Maninder Jeet Singh, counsel for applicant

/ intervener.

Ld. counsel for applicant submitted that the affidavit

could not be filed in compliance of order dated 23.07.2018

as client is unable to come due to facture.

Let the said affidavit be filed positively within four

weeks.

Put up this matter for arguments on 26.07.2019.

Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.



A.No. 239/17 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Rahul Rajpal, counsel for appellant.

Ms. Renu Soni, Nodal Officer for SDMC.

Sh. A.K. Singh, counsel for R-2.

Ld. counsel for respondent no. 2 doesn’t want to file

reply the appeal and they will only file reply to the

application seeking condonation of delay because the

appeal is highly barred by limitation.

Previous costs be deposited.

Put up this matter for filing reply within two weeks /




A.No. 901/16 & 391/18 05.04.2019


Sh. Sanjay Sethi / Sh. Dharamvir Gupta,

counsel for MCD.

None is present on behalf of the appellant.

In the interest of justice, last and final opportunity is

granted for final arguments on 07.08.2019.



A.No. 744/13 & 796/13 05.04.2019


Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD.

It is stated that the copy of dismissal of regularization

application has not been supplied which was rejected on

11.12.2018.

Respondent is directed to supply the said copy

alongwith copy of IN.


02.08.2019.



A.No. 728/16 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. N. Rajput, proxy counsel for appellant.

Sh. Raj Bhushan, JLO from EDMC.

Advocates are not available today.

In the interest of justice, put up this matter for




M.No. 04/17 05.04.2019



It is stated that reply was filed on 04.02.2019.

Advance copy was sent by post.

Put up this matter for arguments on 08.08.2019.



A.No. 701/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. K.B. Gupta, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Hukum Singh, AE(B).

An application for waiver of costs filed by the

respondent.

Arguments heard.

Put up this matter for clarification, if any / orders on

18.04.2019.

Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.



A.No. 920/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. R. Ramachandaran, counsel for appellant


Sh. Sanjay Sethi / Sh. Ashutosh Gupta,

counsel for MCD alongwith Sh. P.K. Chauhan,

AE(B).

Vakalatnama of Sh. Sanjay Sethi and Sh. Ashutosh

Gupta on behalf of respondent filed.

Status report filed by the Dy. Commissioner, Rohini

Zone after approval from Commissioner.

Since it is evident from the status report that the

property of the appellant is similarly placed like the property

mentioned in Annexure-A and it is stated in the status report

that the department is contemplating actions for the

encroachment of other properties of Pocket-H, Sector-7,

Rohini in coordination with maintenance division in due

course of time.

Adjournment sought to file further action taken report

and it becomes evident from the status report that the

property of the appellant was targeted in isolation as there

was direction of the Chairman of PGC, Govt. of NCT of

Delhi.



` Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date.



A.No. 916/17. 05.04.2019

Present : Appellant in person .

File taken up today as an application for early

hearing is moved.

The appellant states that he wants to deposit the

misuse charges calculated by the respondent. He is

permitted to deposit the same and file the G-8 receipt.

Let a notice of the pre-ponement of the appeal be

issued to the respondent for 29.04.2019. Copy of order be

given dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 422/17,412/17 and 413/17. 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Neeraj Bhardwaj counsel for appellant.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD/Ms

Shefali Maghan proxy counsel for Sh. Vikas

Gupta in Appeal NO. 422/17.

Status report filed. Counsel for appellant states that

the affidavit has been deposited with the EE(B) o n

04.09.2018 which makes it clear that previous directions in

that regard were not followed.

Adjournment sought. Put up this matter for filing of

status report by the respondent and arguments on

09.07.2019.



A.No. 493/16 and 769/16. 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Ikbal Husain proxy counsel for Sh. Jabbar

Hussain counsel for appellant .

Sh. Amit Kumar proxy counsel for Sh. Naveen

Grover, counsel for MCD/Sh. Dharamvir

Gupta, counsel for MCD

Adjournment sought on behalf of the appellant as

main counsel has gone Pune for personal work.

Put up the matter for arguments on 05.09.2019.

Interim stay, if any, is extended till next date



A.No. 610/17. 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant .

Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD.

Status report regarding verification could not be filed

as AE(B) could not inspect the property due to illness.

Put up for filing of status report/final arguments on

19.07.2019.




A.No. 96/18. 05.04.2019

Present : None for the appellant.

Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.

Counsel for respondent has already filed written

submissions.

Put up for arguments, if any, by the

appellant/clarification/further proceedings on 25.07.2019.



A.No. 118/19 and 140/17. 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. Deepak Sharma counsel for appellant .

Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. Raj Bhushan, JLO from EDMC in Appeal

No. 140/17.

At request, Put up for final arguments on

12.09.2019.




A.No. 271/18. 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. K.N. Singh, counsel for appellant .

Sh. Amit Kumar proxy counsel for Sh. Naveen

Grover, counsel for MCD alongwith Shri A.K.

Jain AE(B) .

AE(B) concerned filed the status report and states

that non compoundable deviations are in the form of 4th floor

of the property. Concerned AE(B) seeks adjournment tofile

further status report to clarify the alleged non compoundable

deviations.

Let copy of the said status report be supplied to the

counsel for appellant so that he may file objection to that

status report . The copy of status report filed earlier be also

supplied to the counsel for appellant dasti.

For the purpose of measurements to be taken the

property may be desealed for the said purpose on

25.04.2019 in the presence of the appellant.

Put up this matter for filing of status report by the


Copy of the order be given Dasti to both the parties,

as prayed.



A.No. 795/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. S. Hussain and Sh. Ankit Khatri, counsel

for appellant.

File taken up today as an application for early

hearing has been moved.

Hon’ble High Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 3268/2019

has directed that petitioner shall file an application for

preponement of date May 06,2019 to an earlier date. The

ATMCD shall hear the petitioner on the same date or a date

convenient to it, but it should be before May 06, 2019 as

there is an apprehension of the petitioner with regard to the

demolition by the NDMC.

Let notice of this application be issued to the

respondent for 09.04.2019. Notice be issued dasti.



M.No. 7/19 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. S.A. Khan, counsel for applicant /

appellant.

File taken up today as an application u/s 12 of the

contempt of court Act is moved.

Notice of the application be issued to the respondent

for 10.05.2019. Notice be issued dasti.



A.No. 534/18 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. P.K. Rawal, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Vijay Tyagi, counsel for respondent

alongwith Sh. D.K. Gupta, AE(B) conversion.

Reply filed on behalf of the respondent EDMC.

On perusal of the order dated 13.03.2019 it is found

recorded that appellant wants to deposit the conversion

charges.

Ld. counsel for appellant at the very outset submits

that there is some confusion / clarification required

regarding the deposit of the conversion charges, subject

matter of annexure-A for which permission be granted to file

detailed objection.

Heard.

In view of the submissions, the appellant is at liberty

to file the objection to the conversion charges report

annexure –A.

The application is disposed off accordingly.

Put up on date already fixed i.e. 09.05.2019.



A.No. 226/19 05.04.2019

Present : Sh. N.M. Popli, counsel for appellant.

An appeal u/s 347B of the DMC Act has been filed

with the prayer to direct the respondent to give a

reasonable opportunity of being heard while disposing of

representation / reply to show cause notice. The show

cause notice has been placed as annexure-A9.

I have asked the ld. counsel under which clause of

section 347B the present appeal has been filed.

Ld. counsel for appellant pointed out clause 347B(m)

of the DMC Act 1957.

Section 347B (m) speaks of an order directing the

sealing of unauthorized construction u/s 345A. The said

clause is re-produced as below:-

347-B (m): “An order directing the sealing of

unauthorized construction under section 345A.”

Admittedly the sealing order u/s 345A of the DMC Act

is not yet issued by the Quasi Judicial Authority and only a

show cause notice has been issued.

In view of this as well as in view of prayer in appeal,

the present appeal against the sealing show cause notice is

not maintainable. The same is accordingly dismissed.

Appellant is at liberty to move the appropriate forum

after issuing of the sealing order.

Copy of order be given dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 115/18 Statement of Sh. Manish Kumar Singh, AR of the appellant company Indus Tower Ltd. ON SA

I am the authorized representative of the appellant’s company and

I have instructions to withdraw the present appeal unconditionally. The

same may be dismissed as withdrawn. I also request to waive the cost

which is imposed vide order dated 10.12.2018. The company could not

dismantle the tower in question due to dispute with the owner of the

property who did not allow entry for the purpose of dismantling.

RO&AC



A.No. 168/18 Statement of Sh. Ashok Kumar, L.I. Civil Lines Zone, NDMC

ON SA

The property in question is situated in non conforming area and

has been sealed on the ground of misuse. The appellant has deposited

misuse charges amounting to Rs.46,165/- vide G-8 receipt No.74179

dated 21.01.2019. The property does not come under the 21960

industrial units in which Commissioner, MCD filed the affidavit before the

Hon’ble Supreme Court in M.C.Mehta vs UOI Writ Petition (C) No.

4677/1985. The property can only be used for residential purpose only.

RO&AC



a.no. 805/18 05.04.2019 respondent has already filed...

Documents