amcdonline.gov.in/at/dailyordersnew/431_22.10.2018.pdf · 2018. 10. 30. · stipulated in mpd-2021...

A.No. 280/18

22.10.2018 Present : Sh.Vikram Singh, counsel for the appellant.

Sh.Jatin Aggarwal, counsel for the respondent.

Appellant is not present.

Copy of the order of Hon'ble High Court of

Delhi dated 23.07.2018 is placed on record by the

counsel for the appellant.

Put up for appearance of appellant/further

proceedings on 12.11.2018.

(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O. Appellate Tribunal:MCD

22.10.2018

A.No. 846/16

22.10.2018 Present : Sh. Yashpal Sapra, counsel for the appellant.

Ms. Manjusha Jha, counsel for the respondent.

Status report in compliance of order dated

08.01.2018 filed stating that appellant was required to

pay an amount of Rs. 3,76,658/- on account of 10 times

penalty for conversion charges (details as mentioned in

para no.4).

Put up for orders/clarifications if any on

22.11.2018.


22.10.2018

A.No. 971/13, 976/13, 1087/13

22.10.2018 Present : Sh. Sandeep Singh Yadav, counsel for the

appellant (appeal no. 976/13).

None for appellant Anjana Bansal.

Sh.H.R.Aggarwal/ Sh. Arbind Jha/Ms. Manjusha

Jha/ counsel for the respondent/EDMC.

Sh. Chanchal Kumar/Sh R.K. Singh counsel for

the DDA alongwith Nodal Officer Ms. Anju

Sharma.

Status reports filed. In appeal no.971/13, it is

stated that appellant/Suresh Kumar Jain has not

deposited the misuse charges of Rs.3,60,768/- and has

not filed the objection. In appeal no. 976/13,

appellant/Anjana Bansal has not deposited the misuse

charges of Rs. 1,17,830/- and has not filed any

objections. In appeal no. 1087/13, appellant/Anju Dhawan

has not deposited the misuse charges of Rs. 13,958/-

and no counsel is present on her behalf.

Adjournment sought to file objections.

Put up for that purpose and for final arguments

on 13.05.2019.


22.10.2018

A.No. 1031/13,

22.10.2018 Present : Sh. Arvind Nagar proxy counsel for Sh. Ravinder

Sehrawat counsel for appellant

Ms. Manjusha Jha/ counsel for the

respondent/EDMC.

Sh. Chanchal Kumar/Sh R.K. Singh counsel for

the DDA alongwith Nodal Officer Ms. Anju

Sharma.

Status reports filed stating that appellant has

deposited the misuse charges of Rs. 20,966/-. Copy

supplied.

Put up for final arguments if any/orders on

01.11.2018.


22.10.2018

A.No. 892/17

22.10.2018 Present : Ms. Bandana, counsel for the appellant.

Sh.V.K. Aggarwal counsel for the respondent.

Adjournment sought to file reply to the

application u/o 22 R1 . Copy supplied today.

Counsel for appellant has placed on record

copy of the receipt dated 05.10.2018 regarding deposit of

misuse charges. Copy supplied.

Put up for reply/arguments/ clarification on

03.12.2018.


22.10.2018

A.No. 706/15

22.10.2018 Present : Sh.V.K. Bajaj, counsel for the appellant.

Sh.A.L.Agnihotri, counsel for the respondent.

Ms. Komal proxy counsel for Sh. Praveen Suri

counsel for the applicant with applicant.

Sh. Chanchal Kumar counsel for the DDA

alongwith Nodal Officer Ms. Anju Sharma.

Part arguments heard.

Put up for remaining arguments on 05.02.2019.


22.10.2018

A.No. 268/16

22.10.2018 Present : Mohd. Zafar Abbas, counsel for the appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal counsel for the respondent.

Adjournment sought for arguments.

Put up for final arguments on 28.02.2019.


22.10.2018

A.No. 229/17, 230/17, 231/17, 232/17

22.10.2018 Present : Sh.Zafar Abbas, Sh. Sanjiv Arora, Sh. Ishan

Jayant Tewari, counsel for the appellant.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for EDMC

(appeal no. 229/17).

Sh. Sandeep Gupta, counsel for EDMC in

remaining appeals. Vakalatnama on behalf of

respondent filed.

Counsel for the appellant at the very outset

submitted that shortcomings as noted in order dated

30.07.2018 from serial no. 1 to 4 has been rectified and

subsequently with respect to plot no. 278 and 279 Guru

Ram Dass Nagar, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi (subject property in

appeal no. 232/17 and 229/17) sanctioned building plan

has been issued.

Adjournment sought. Respondent is

directed to fie status report in view of the submissions

made today by the counsel for the appellant.

On 30.07.2018 appellant was directed to file

affidavit stating that order dated 20.04.2017 has been

complied with and regularization application has been

rejected wrongly.

Adjournment sought to file said affidavit

also.

Put up for compliance and status report by

the respondent on 01.02.2019.

Interim orders, if any, to continue till next

date of hearing.


22.10.2018

A.No. 847/14

22.10.2018 Present : Sh.Vimal Dhingra, counsel for the appellant.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for SDMC.

Status report as find mentioned received on

Whatapp by the counsel for respondent on 22.01.2018

was filed on 23.01.2018.

Fresh arguments heard.

Put up for clarifications if any/orders on

15.11.2018.


22.10.2018

A.No. 515/18

22.10.2018 Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi , counsel for the appellant.

Sh. Rajiv Kumar,counsel for the respondent and filed

vakalatnama.

Concerned AE(B) Sh. D.P.Sharma.

Fresh Vakalatnama on behalf of appellant filed.

Fresh status report filed stating that

demolition order dated 26.06.2018 was served upon Sh.

Raj Kumar Chaudhary, husband of the appellant and no

reply was filed. It is further stated that Raj Kumar

Chaudhary husband of the appellant filed reply on

27.06.2018 to the first show cause notice dated

08.06.2018. However, before passing the demolition

order dated 26.07.2018 reply to the show cause notice

dated 08.06.2018 was also examined by the

respondent/EDMC. It is clarified by the counsel for the

respondent that subsequent demolition order was passed

on 26.07.2018 in view of the consideration of reply dated

27.06.2018 which was received after passing of the

demolition order dated 26.06.2018. It is further submitted

that status report filed may be considered as not

contradictory to the record of the respondent. Regarding

verification of the structure as shown in the affidavit

property was inspected on 18.10.2018 for comparison.

The measurement which was shown in the affidavit are

almost same . however, the projection with structure on

municipal land at first floor and second floor has not

been shown in the affidavit.

Counsel for the appellant seeks

adjournment to inspect the record and to submit

arguments.

Put up for final arguments on 15.05.2019.


date of hearing.


22.10.2018

A.No. 245/17

22.10.2018 Present : Mohd Zamil one of the appellant in person

Sh.V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for the North DMC.

None for respondent no. 6 & 7.

One of the appellant has moved an

application for filing fresh address of the respondent no. 2

to 5.

It seems that fresh address supplied by the

appellant is with regard to the service upon respondent

no. 2 to 5. Let fresh notice be issued to respondent no. 2

to 5 on fresh address.

Cost of Rs. 2000/- imposed upon the

appellant on 20.07.2018 not deposited. He is directed to

deposit the same within a week.

Put up for service of respondent no. 2 to 5

on fresh address on 20.01.2019.


22.10.2018

A.No. 802/17

22.10.2018 Present : Sh.K.B.Gupta, counsel for the appellant.

Sh.Madan Sagar, counsel for the respondent.

None for Monitoring Committee.


08.10.2018 filed stating that property abuts on

master/zonal plan road having right of way more than 18

meters. It can be used for certain specified activities as

stipulated in MPD-2021 in chapter-15 (clase15.7.3) under

the head of Other Activity.

Regarding difference of conversion/ parking

charges payable by the appellant, same are not payable

as property is lying sealed since 30.11.2006 and there

was no notification regarding fixation of the charges on

account of conversion/ mixed used charges. However,

MPD-2021 governing and regulating use of particular

property, even came into being or inception on

07.02.2017 and notification dated 22.06.2007 for

conversion charges has its retrospective effect, the

owner/user are liable to pay charges for the financial year

2006-07. The appellant has deposited the following

charges as find mentioned in para no.4. It is further

submitted that appellant is not liable to pay any difference

of conversion/parking charges since the property is lying

sealed since 06.11.2006. Copy of status report supplied

to the counsel for the appellant.

Counsel for the appellant has argued that

appeal is with regard to ground floor only.

Regarding objection of the Monitoring

Committee about unauthorized construction at fourth

floor, respondent is directed to file status report in that

regard.

A.No. 802/17 -2-

Ld Counsel for the appellant further argued

that since property was sealed in the year 2006 is having

protection under the National Capital Territory of Delhi

Laws (Special Provisions) Second (Amendment) Act,

2017 dated 31.12.2017.

Counsel for the respondent submitted that

concerned AE(B) be called to clarify the said point and to

make statement in that regard.

Put up for appearance of concerned AE(B)

and remaining arguments on 30.10.2018.

Copy of this order be given dasti.


22.10.2018

A.No.

22.10.2018 Present : Sh. , counsel for the appellant.

Sh. counsel for the respondent.


22.10.2018

A.No. 267/15


Ms.Praveen Sharma, counsel for the respondent.


14.09.2018 filed stating that demolition action taken on

26.11.2012 and the objectionable portion raised in rear

portion of first floor in the shape of room was completely

demolished. It is further stated that cause of action has

initiated on 14.05.2012 still persisted as there are

deviations/excess coverage at ground floor, first floor and

second floor; for the purpose of ascertaining exact

quantum of deviations, it is prerequisite to have copy of

sanctioned building plan so that a detailed report can be

placed before this Tribunal. Respondent is directed to

make best efforts to get the copy of the sanctioned

building plan and thereafter file the status report.

Counsel for the appellant pointed out that

present appeal is with regard to property no. 52/74

C.R.Park New Delhi and present status report is with

regard to property no. 52/69 C.R. Park in compliance of

order dated 21.07.2017. It is evident from the status

report filed today that demolition action is still required in

the property no. 52/69 in pursuance to the demolition

order. The reasons for not completing the action is not

satisfactory and is ambiguous. Respondent is directed to

file complete status report regarding action taken in

pursuance to the demolition order qua the property no.

52/69,C.R.Park, New Delhi.Concerned AE(B) to remain

present for explanation .

Part arguments heard. Adjournment sought

for further arguments.

A.No. 267/15 -2-

Put up for remaining arguments/ filing of

complete status report with regard to action taken on

08.01.2019.


date of hearing. Copy of this order be given dasti.

Copy of this order as well as previous order

be placed before the concerned Dy. Commissioner for

information and necessary action.


22.10.2018

A.No. 382/16


Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD.

Part arguments heard.

Put up this matter for remaining arguments on

17.01.2019.

Both the parties are directed to file written brief

submissions not exceeding to 5 pages within a week if not

filed.


date of hearing.


22.10.2018

A.No. 875/15

22.10.2018 Present : None for the appellant.

Sh. V.K. Aggarwal counsel for the respondent

alongwith concerned AE(B).

Status report filed stating that property was

desealed on 04.09.2018 for dismantling. As per

inspection of JE(B) on 15.10.2018 found that appellant

has not dismantled the tower.

On 01.06.2018 Sh. Manish Kumar Singh,

AR of the appellant has made the statement for

dismantling the tower and disposal of the appeal. In view

of the said statement made by the AR of the appellant on

01.06.2018 appeal is dismissed. Respondent is at liberty

to take action as per law in pursuance to the demolition

order.

Respondent is directed to file action taken

report on 14.12.2018. Registrar is directed to prepare a

miscellaneous file for this purpose.

File be consigned to Record Room.


22.10.2018

A.No. 61/18, 62/18


Sh. Ashutosh Gupta,counsel for the respondent.

Written submission were filed by the

appellant.

Counsel for respondent seeks some more

time to file the written submissions. Let the same be filed

within a week. Advance copy of the written submission

be supplied by the respondent to the appellant.

Put up for perusal of written

submissions/arguments if any on 16.11.2018.


22.10.2018

A.No. 1078/15


Sh. Rajiv Garg, Nodal officer on behalf of

respondent.

Status report filed stating that as per

inspection done on 18.10.2018 it was noticed that the

tower in question has been dismantled.

Authorized Representative of appellant has

already made statement on 01.06.2018 for dismissal of

the appeal.

Since the tower has been dismantled, the

appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. File be consigned to

Record Room. Respondent is at liberty to take action as

per law.


22.10.2018

A.No. 73/16


Sh.Mohit Sharma, counsel for the respondent.

Status report not filed. Respondent is

directed to file status report regarding dismantling of

tower in response to order dated 31.08.2018 within two

weeks.

Put up for filing status report on 15.11.2018.


22.10.2018

A.No. 780/16 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Amit Jain, counsel for appellant.

Sh. R.N.Vats, counsel for respondent.

The notification u/s 253 subsection (1)(2) of

NDMC Act 1994 in favour of the undersigned is not received

from the Ministry of Home Affairs and as such the appeal

cannot be entertained by this Tribunal.

Put up this matter for awaiting notification from

the Ministry Of Home Affairs and further proceedings on

10.4.2019.

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

Appellate Tribunal:MCD 22.10.2018

A.No. 678/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. R.B. Singh, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Sanjeev Kumar Yadav, counsel for SDMC.

Memo of appearance filed by Sh. Sanjeev

Kumar Yadav and seeks time to file Vakalatnama.

Record not produced.

AE(B) is absent despite service on

11.10.2018.

Dy. Commissioner concerned to appear in

person alongwith record on 26.11.2018.



A.No. 532/18 22.10.2018

Present : None for the appellant.

It seems that process has not been taken by

the appellant which was given dasti.

Issue notice to the respondent to produce the

record on 12.11.2018.



A.No. 729/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Dhananjay Mehlwat counsel for the appellant

Sh. Dinesh Khatri counsel for respondent.

Memo of appearance filed by Sh. Dinesh

Khatri and seeks time to file Vakalatnama.

Record not produced on the ground that

record is to be produced by the headquarter.

Nodal Officer is directed to inform the

headquarter to produce the record tomorrow failing which

Dy. Commissioner concerned will appear in person.

Put up on 23.10.2018.

Copy of the order be given Dasti.



A.No. 676/18, 574/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Gagandeep Panwar, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Mohit Sharma counsel for EDMC (appeal no.

676/18).

Sh. Shashikant Sharma counsel for EDMC

(appeal no. 574/18).

Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.

AE(B) Sh. S.K. Katara is present and states that he

has not brought the record regarding demolition

proceedings but states that demolition order has already

been passed.

Status report filed regarding sealing appeal bearing

no. 676/18 stating that property has been constructed

without getting Sanctioned Building Plan and was booked

for demolition on 05.09.2017. Sealing show cause notice

was given on 15.02.2018 through speed post and no reply

was received. Sealing order was passed on 21.05.2018 by

the competent authority. Vacation notice u/s 349 of DMC

Act was issued on 03.07.2018. During sealing/demolition

program dated 04.07.2018 the property was sealed at 8

points i.e 2 points at basement, 2 shutter at ground floor and

showroom, 2 points at back side and 1 point at gate of

staircase at 2nd floor. An application for desealing the

property was submitted to Dy. Commissioner Shahdara

North zone on 19.07.2018. Regarding measurements given

in the affidavit of the structure, it is stated that

measurements were not correct as per actual

measurements given in para no.9.

Appellant is directed to clarify the differences in the

measurements given by them in the affidavit viz-a-viz

measurements mentioned in the status report.

A.No. 676/18, 574/18 -2-

Adjournment sought to produce the record regarding

demolition of the property. Respondent is directed to clarify

whether the property is having any protection under special

laws as is being claimed by the appellant wherein it is stated

that property has been constructed in the year 2011-12 after

it was purchased vide registered Sale Deed dated

28.09.2012.

Put up for producing the original record regarding

demolition order /clarification in the status report regarding

protection if any on 27.11.2018.

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

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

as prayed.



A.No. 145/16 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Tarun Aggarwal, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Sandeep Manglik, Nodal Officer for North

DMC alongwith Ms. Sunita Saryavanshi,

AZI/CLZ and Sh. Suresh Dua, AE(B).

Copy of property tax deposited by the appellant has

been filed.

Status report filed stating that property details have

been obtained from the House Tax Department wherein

appellant has filed property tax for the covered area of 10

sqm. in the year 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16. In the

year 2016-17 the property tax for the covered area of 34

sqm. has been filed by the appellant. The structure factor

for the year 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 has been shown

as 0.70 whereas in the PTR of 2016-17 the structure factor

is shown as 1.00. It is further submitted that the property in

question is situated in an unauthorized colony.

The above details shows that till the year 2015-16 the

property in question was having a covered area of 10 sqm.

which was enhanced to 34 sqm. during the year 2016-17.

As such the property is not protected from demolition under

The National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special

Provisions) Second (Amendment) Act, 2017. Copy of status

report alongwith copy of property tax record supplied to

counsel for appellant.

Adjournment sought.

Put up this matter for filing objections to the status

report and final arguments on 14.01.2019.



A.No. 995/17 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Subhash Dagar, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Pradeep Sharma, L.I.

Copy of chain of ownership documents filed by the

appellant. Original shown and returned.

Arguments heard.

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

31.10.2018.



A.No. 384/18 22.10.2018

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

Ms. Sarita Gaur, ALO for North DMC

alongwith Sh. Pradeep Sharma, L.I.

Status report filed by the AO, City SP Zone stating

that back portion of the property at ground floor was sealed

on 20.12.2017 on account of misuse after following the

process under section 345-A of DMC Act on 19.09.2017.

Smt. Sunita Goyal has made an application for

temporary dealing of the property for removal of machinery

and goods.

No order has been passed by the competent

authority for desealing. However, in compliance of the

directions of Addl. Commissioner, misuse charges were

calculated and given to the appellant.

Appellant has deposited the misuse charges on

14.09.2018 vide G8 Receipt No. 18021 to the tune of Rs.

1,20,401/-. Since the property situated in non-confirming /

residential area, industrial activities are not allowed.

Arguments heard.

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

30.10.2018.



A.No. 492/17 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Satish Kumar, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Tarun Sabharwal, counsel for MCD.

Fresh Vakalatnama on behalf of appellant filed.

It is stated by counsel for appellant that regularization

application has been filed by the appellant on 28.09.2018.

Put up this matter for filing status report regarding

decision of regularization application and further

proceedings on 05.12.2018.



A.No. 690/13 22.10.2018

Present : Ms. Radha Yadav, proxy counsel for Sh. J.J.

Tyagi, counsel for appellant.

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

Appellant has not deposited the misuse charges

despite seeking four weeks time on the ground that

appellant is in Dehradun as his son is suffering from

dengue.

Two weeks time sought.

Put up this matter for compliance of previous orders

regarding deposit of misuse charges on 26.11.2018.



A.No. 1025/17 22.10.2018

Present : None for appellant.

Sh. Sarvesh Kumar, proxy counsel for Sh.

Anand Prakash, counsel for MCD.

None has appeared on behalf of the appellant.

Put up this matter for remaining arguments as per the

previous order / further proceedings on 08.01.2019.



P.No. 29/13 22.10.2018

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

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

Sh. Ajay Gautam, EE(B), Mohd. Idris, AE(B),

Sh. D. Chowdhary, ALO and Ms. Renu Soni,

Nodal Officer for SDMC.

Sh. Dev Bharti, proxy counsel for Ms. Dipti

Dogra, counsel for DDA alongwith Ms. Anju

Sharma, JLO for DDA.

Status report filed in compliance of order dated

16.01.2018 signed by Commissioner, SDMC stating that

upon having the knowledge of order dated 27.11.2017 of

this Tribunal, a meeting was arranged with Vice-Chairman,

DDA on 15.06.2018 in terms of the directions of this

Tribunal. Regarding taking appropriate disciplinary action

against the erring officials who delayed the processing,

necessary show cause notice in this regard has been issued

/ served upon the concerned officials who were remained

posted during the relevant period of time and responsible for

the delay in compliance of order dated 27.11.2017. Copy of

show cause notice dated 05.10.2018 as issued in this

regard is annexed herewith as Annexure-B. Further action

will be taken in due course by following due process in this

regard.

It is further stated that regarding present

regularization application, the same is entirely distinct and

different for the reason that structures to be regularized are

enormous and had come up without getting the building

plan sanctioned. The sanction of such structures requires a

number of statutory clearances / NOCs such as approval

from Delhi Urban Art Commissioner (DUAC), NOC from

CFO / DFS, change of land use from DDA etc. The said

requirement is not on record in view of the given status of

structures which are unauthorized.

P.No. 29/13 - 2 -

The regularization is last stage of process. Before

regularization, certain issues need to be got addressed and

settled in consultation and approval of DDA, which is

apparent from the minutes of the meeting.

It is further stated that as per MPD-2001, MPD-2021

and ZDP of Zone-F, the land use of site under reference is

“Recreational (City Park, District Park, Community Park).

Apparently, the existing use of land is in contravention of

permitted use. Therefore, change of land use from DDA is

first and foremost requirement in this case. The zonal office

of respondent has already taken necessary steps in this

regard.

In view of status of structures and requirement of a

number of statutory of clearances, the application for

regularization of structures will take time to finalize. The

zonal authorities have been instructed to ensure timely

compliance of orders of this Tribunal in future. Copy of

status report supplied to counsel for appellant.

Ld. counsel for appellant pointed out that the

compliance of the directions given to the appellant vide

order 05.07.2018 has not been done on 11.09.2018.

Ld. counsel for respondent submitted that the

documents submitted by the appellant needs time for

scrutiny and three months time sought.

Put up this matter for filing status report of action

taken with regard to the compliance by the appellant of the

requirements of the respondent to proceed further in the

matter towards the regularization of the structure.

Respondent is further directed to file status report

regarding disciplinary action taken in pursuance to the show

cause notice given to the delinquent employees.

Appellant is directed to remain regularly in touch with

the concerned officers which will initiate the proceedings

and he will take necessary steps with regard to the

documents submitted by the appellant.

P.No. 29/13 - 3 -

Put up this matter for compliance of the directions

and further proceedings on 19.12.2018.


as prayed.



A.No. 388/16 22.10.2018


Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD.

Put up this matter again during the course of day for

withdrawal of the appeal.



03.00 pm


Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD.

No one has appeared on behalf of the appellant

despite several calls since morning.

It is 3.00 p.m.

Hence, the appeal is dismissed in default and for

non-prosecution. Respondent is at liberty to take action in

the property in question in pursuance of impugned order

and file status report regarding any further action is required

or not.

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 file

for the purpose of filing status report / action taken report by

the respondent on 31.10.2018.

Copy of the order be given Dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 756/18 22.10.2018

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

This is an appeal against sealing order dated

06.09.2018. The property is stated to have been sealed on

01.10.2018.

It is stated that the second floor of the property was

got regularized on 30.12.2008. The first floor was

purchased in the year 1999 and exists in the same position

and is having protection under The National Capital

Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second

(Amendment) Act, 2017.

It is further submitted that the property has been

sealed because of mala-fide intention as some person is

having eyes on the property which exists on commercial

road.

The appellant is now residing on rent.

Ld. counsel for appellant has prayed for short date.

Issue notice of the appeal and application to the

respondent through concerned Chief Law Officer. AE(B) is

directed to appear in person alongwith entire record of the

proceedings, status report and reply of the appeal on date

fixed.

Put up this matter on 29.10.2018.

Notice be given Dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 1026/17 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. S.D. Ansari, counsel for appellant.

File taken up today in pursuance of order dated

12.10.2018 listed before Ld. District & Session Judge (HQ)

in MCD Appl. No. 1/18 wherein parties were directed to

appear today for fixing the date for arguments.

Sh. S.D. Ansari, counsel for appellant is present

today. None has appeared on behalf of the respondent.

As per the directions of Ld. District & Session Judge,

appellant as well as respondent will be given only one

opportunity for addressing the arguments and no

adjournment shall be granted as they cannot seek any

adjournment to address the arguments.

The matter is already listed for 28.11.2018.

Put up this matter for arguments on the date already

fixed i.e. 28.11.2018.



A.No. 265/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Arvind Aggarwal (advocate), appellant

no.5 in person.

File taken up today on an application under section

347(C)(7) of DMC Act r/w section 31(C) of DDA Act for

summoning the witness alongwith documents from the

respondent.

Let the notice of the application be issued to the

respondent for date already fixed i.e. on 07.12.2018.



A.No. 791/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. R.K. Goyal, counsel for appellant.

This is an appeal against demolition order dated

20.08.2018 which was received by the appellant on

18.09.2018.

It is further submitted that the show cause notice was

never received by the appellant.





fixed.

Put up this matter on 26.10.2018. Notice be given

Dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 783/18 22.10.2018

Present : Ms. Divya Upadhyay, counsel for appellant.


25.09.2018. Property is stated to have been sealed on the

same day.

Appeal against the demolition order is listed for

15.11.2018.





fixed.




A.No. 787/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Ramesh Chand, counsel for appellant.


14.09.2018. Property is stated to have been sealed on

25.09.2018.

Ld. counsel for appellant stated that reply filed duly

received with the office of Dy. Commissioner is not

considered while passing the sealing order.

It is further stated that ground floor of the property

was being used for car parking and godown.

It is further stated that the appellant was forced to

vacate the premises despite it was not use of any

commercial / industrial purpose and they were forced with

the help of police force and thereafter the premises was

forcibly sealed.





fixed. Record be deposited immediately in the Tribunal.




A.No. 754/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.

This is an appeal against the order of rejection of

regularization application dated 01.08.2018.

Appeal against demolition order is listed for

28.01.2019.






Put up this matter on 28.01.2019. Notice be given

Dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 786/18 22.10.2018

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

This is an appeal against the order of rejection of

regularization application dated 05.09.2018 alongwith

application seeking condonation of delay.

Appeal against demolition of the property is listed for

25.10.2018.







Notice be given Dasti, as prayed.



A.No. 796/17 22.10.2018


None for respondent.

The matter was listed for clarification as no proper

original documents filed by the appellant.

Let court notice be issued to the appellant to file the

title documents on 13.11.2018.



A.No. 813/14 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Vikas Aggarwal, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Rajiv Garg, Nodal Officer for North DMC

alongwith Sh. B.P. Singh, AE(B).

He has ready to make statement regarding

restoration of the walls for removal of the property was

booked at ground floor at the time of booking of ground floor

was owned by Ms. Simrat Katyal who was owner, brother-

in-law of Simrat Katyal has purchased it.

It is submitted that it is an ancestral house where

appellant as well as respondent no. 2 were living for more

than 50 years. Concerned AE(B) is directed to file clear-cut

status report regarding the use of entire building owner by

the appellant as well as brother in law who has now

purchased the ground floor.

Further, AE(B) is directed to clarify about the nature

of road / property can be used for what purpose whether it is

a mixed land use or notified road or a commercial road

where the property abuts.

Appellant is directed to remain present on next date

of hearing.

Put up this matter on 02.11.2018 for further

proceedings.



A.No. 616/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Shantanu Bhardwaj, counsel for appellant

alongwith appellant.

Sh. Vijay Tyagi, counsel for MCD alongwith

Sh. Rakesh Rawat, Supdt. General Branch.


Record not produced on the ground that dealing clerk

was on leave.

Ld. counsel for appellant states that the property was

sealed for want of required licence and the required licence

was issued by the respondent on 23.11.2017 and the

property was sealed on 27.10.2017.

It is further stated that the appellant has got the

licence on 27.11.2017 and after obtaining the same,

appellant has applied for desealing.

It is further submitted that in the vicinity there are

various shops in the similar nature and the same are not

sealed.

Respondent is directed to take action on the

application of appellant moved for desealing after obtaining

the licence and file the status report alongwith original

record of the proceedings.

In case, the record not produced and status report

not filed, Dy. Commissioner concerned will appear in person

on next date of hearing.

Respondent is further directed to clarify / file status

report regarding misuse charges / penalty charges if any,

and for what purpose, the premises can be used.

Put up this matter for filing status report by the

respondent and arguments on 26.10.2018.


as prayed.



A.No. 448/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. M. Hussain, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD.


Status report filed stating that sealing notice under

section 345-A of the DMC Act was issued on 27.04.2018

which was served through speed post. Reply was received

on 04.05.2018. Personal hearing was offered for

01.06.2018.

After hearing, sealing order was passed on

20.06.2018 and the property was sealed at ground floor at

18 points, first floor and second floor sealed one point each,

third floor sealed at three points, fourth floor sealed at one

point. Main entry of first floor to fourth floor sealed at ground

floor.

Property is lying sealed total 25 points.

Ld. counsel for appellant submitted that connected

appeal is listed for 26.11.2018.

At request, put up this matter for consideration /

arguments on 26.11.2018.



A.No. 177/18 & 639/18 22.10.2018

Present : Ms. Pooja, proxy counsel for Sh. S.S. Tomar,

counsel for appellant.

Ms. Nagina Jain / Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, proxy

counsel for Sh. Harbans Kaushal, counsel for

MCD alongwith Sh. Sanjay Gupta, ALO.

Vakalatnama of Sh. Harbans Kaushal on behalf of

respondent filed in appeal no. 639/18.

Status report filed stating that property was inspected

on 03.10.2018 in the presence of representatives of the

appellant. The details of deviations against the sanctioned

building plan starting from basement to stilt, ground floor,

first floor, second floor, third floor and terrace floor has been

given in details.

Copy of status report supplied to the appellant with

the directions to bring the property within the parameters of

Sanctioned Building Plan by seeking regularization of

compoundable areas and to demolish the non-

compoundable areas in the entire property. With regard to

the unauthorized construction qua the terrace floor which is

not permissible except the toilet, appellant is directed to

demolish the same itself otherwise respondent is at liberty

to take action as per law.

Property is stated to be under construction.

Put up this matter for reply on the application seeking

condonation of delay / filing objections if any to the status

report filed by the respondent / compliances of the

directions issued today on 10.12.2018.



A.No. 583/18 & 175/18 22.10.2018

Present : Sh. Dalip Rastogi, counsel for appellant.

Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for MCD

alongwith Sh. Anurag Sharma, JE(B).

Fresh Vakalatnama filed on behalf of appellant.

Vakalatnama of Sh. Dharamvir Gupta on behalf of

respondent filed.

Status report filed stating that property was booked

for unauthorized construction on 04.12.2017. Show cause

notice was issued. Demolition order was passed on

13.12.2017. Demolition action took place on 08.01.2018 at

the roof of third floor, roof of seven rooms demolished fully,

roof of two stores and two kitchens was also demolished,

iron girders of demolished rooms and portions also

demolished and cut down with the help of iron gas cutter

and three partition walls also demolished.

Sealing show cause notice u/s 345-A of DMC Act

was sent to the appellant through speed post on 25.07.2018

to which reply was filed on 08.08.2018 alongwith certain

documents claiming the property to be old constructed and

permissible repairs carried out on the stilt structure without

any addition, alteration or structural changes in the property.

Appellant did not seek any personal hearing and as such

sealing order was passed on 20.09.2018.

It is further stated that photographs were taken on

08.06.2018 depict that new construction was going on.

Work stop notice was issued on 13.06.2018 and 23.06.2018

to SHO, Sabzi Mandi as well as to the owner but he failed to

stop the construction.

The existing construction has been compared with

the construction shown in the affidavit dated 29.08.2018 and

the details mentioned in the affidavit does not tally with the

existing construction. Site plan has been prepared of the

property and annexed alongwith status report.

A.No. 583/18 & 175/18 - 2 -

The deviations in the site plan vis-à-vis structure

mentioned in the affidavit have been shown in para no. 3 of

status report at four points.

Ld. counsel for appellant has submitted that the

appellant has already applied for regularization on

18.10.2018.

Respondent is directed to file status report regarding

the said application. Copy of the application supplied to the

respondent.

Appellant is directed to clarify the differences in the

structure mentioned in the affidavit vis-à-vis status report

and in case, there was deficiency in the affidavit, fresh

affidavit be filed and supplied to the AE(B) within a week,

failing which necessary adverse orders will be passed on

next date of hearing.

Ld. counsel for appellant pointed out that the property

number has been mentioned as BC-400/3 in the order dated

27.08.2018 whereas the correct property number is BC-

100/3.

The said order dated 27.08.2018 is ordered to be

amended to that extent wherein property number be read as

BC-100/3 instead of BC-400/3.

Put up this matter for filing status report regarding the

regularization application by the respondent and arguments

on 10.04.2019.


as prayed.

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



amcdonline.gov.in/at/dailyordersnew/431_22.10.2018.pdf · 2018. 10. 30. · stipulated in mpd-2021...

Documents