(raj kumar chauhan) ad&sj-cum-p.o....
TRANSCRIPT
A.No. 321/18 & 322/18
06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Rahul Malik , counsel for the appellant.
These appeals are against the demolition
order dated 17.09.2014 and sealing order dated
16.12.2014 which were allegedly issued against the
property bearing no. C-37 whereas property already
owned by the appellant since 2017 is bearing no. C-
38A, Shiv Park.
Ld counsel further pointed out that said notice
was served in the name of Nigam Chaudhary who
has no concern with the property in question at any
point of time. It is further stated that C-37 is
different property and is existing on the spot but
place of the same is not known to the counsel for
the appellant.
Ld counsel for the appellant seeks
adjournment to file the chain of the documents of
the property which were handed over to the
appellant by the previous owner Sh. Ankit Gupta.
Let the same be filed positively by the next date.
It is pointed out that the civil suit was instituted
by the appellant against the respondent wherein
status report was filed which was ambiguous and
did not relate to the property of the appellant
therefore suit was withdrawn by the appellant.
-2-
Notice of the appeal/application be issued to
the respondent through concerned Chief Law
Officer. AE (B) is directed to appear in person
alongwith entire record of the proceedings, status
report/reply of the appeal on the next date. Record
be deposited in the Tribunal immediately.
Put up on 26.07.2018. Notice be given Dasti,
as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 762/17
06.06.2018
Present : Sh.Anuj Kr. Garg, counsel for the appellant.
Sh.K.K. Arora, counsel for the respondent.
Status report filed regarding inspection of the
premises viz-a-viz affidavit of the appellant stating
that details supplied by the appellant in the affidavit
was matched with the existing construction.
An application u/o 1 R 10 filed by one Mohd
Hanif who is present with counsels Sh.Mohd Elahi
and Ms. Dimple . Copy of the application supplied to
the appellant and respondent.
Put up for reply/arguments on the said
application/arguments on 15.11.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 435/17
06.06.2018
Present : Sh.Vipin, proxy counsel for Sh. Deepak
Sharma, counsel for the appellant.
Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for the respondent.
Status report filed stating that regularization
application has been dismissed vide order
dated 08.02.2018 on the ground of non-
compliance of IN dated 27.12.2017 despite
service of the same upon the appellant. Copy
supplied.
Put up for final arguments on 02.11.2018.
Interim order to continue till next date.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 874/16 & 875/16
06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Himanshu Nainwal , proxy counsel for the
appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for the
respondent with Nodal officer.
Adjournment sought for arguments.
Put up for final arguments on 13.11.2018
Interim order to continue till next date.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 829/17 & 830/17
06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Ambika Rai , counsel for the appellant.
Sh.V.K. Aggarwal counsel for the respondent.
Short adjournment sought for arguments.
At request, put up for final arguments on
20.09.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 56/17
06.06.2018
Present : Sh.R.P. Kaushik, counsel for the appellant.
Sh.Anil Mishra counsel for the respondent alongwith
Sh. Raj Bhushan, JLO.
Affidavit of the appellant in compliance of order dated
04.01.2018 regarding ownership of the entire property from
ground floor to fourth floor filed today. Copy supplied.
Status report also filed by the respondent which is
ambiguous and does not satisfy the requirement as was
directed to file status report as to what basis respondent has
come to the conclusion that other floors are owned by other
persons.
It is submitted that report/information was given by the
previous Assistance Engineer Sumant Singh who is under
suspension.
This is no ground for not filing the status report. In that
regard opinion are to be formed on the material basis and not
on the personal knowledge of any of the officer of the MCD.
Adjournment sought to file complete status report in
that regard.
Put up for arguments/filing of complete status report
on 05.10.2018.
Interim order to continue till next date.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 272/13
06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Anil Kr. Sharma & Sanjay Garg, counsel
for the appellant.
Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for the respondent
with Sh. Laxman Singh SVI.
Status report filed by the Assistant Director
(Vig) through Sh. Laxman Singh wherein some
more time is sought to submit the outcome of the
investigation before this Tribunal, after the approval
of Chief Vigliance Officer, EDMC.
Reply to the application u/o 7 R 14 not filed.
Some documents were filed on 06.03.2018.
Copy was not supplied. Let the copy of the same be
supplied to the respondent if not earlier supplied.
Put up for filing status report of the vigilance
report/ reply to the application u/o 7 R 14 CrPC/Final
arguments on 10.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 426/14 & 428/14
06.06.2018
Present : Sh.Gaurav Jain , counsel for the appellant.
Sh.A. K. Jha counsel for the respondent.
Vakalatnama filed on behalf of respondent.
Status report filed stating that application has
been filed and letter has been issued on 30.05.2018
to the appellant to deposit the requisite fee for
processing the said application. Copy given.
Counsel for the appellant states that draft was
already submitted. However, in case same required
revalidation, same will be submitted within 15 days.
Put up for filing status report by the
respondent in that regard on 30.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 730/15, 731/15
06.06.2018
Present : Sh.Gaurav Jain, counsel for the appellant.
Sh.V.K. Aggarwal proxy counsel for Ms.
Nagina Jain counsel for the respondent.
Adjournment sought for final arguments.
Put up for final arguments on 29.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 320/16
06.06.2018
Present : Sh.Gaurav Jain, counsel for the appellant.
Sh. Anil Mishra, counsel for the respondent.
Ld counsel for the respondent
submitted that appellant has not applied and
no application has been filed in compliance of
order dated 16.02.2018. It is further submitted
that sealing has been tampered and appellant
perhaps using the tower.
Respondent was directed to take
further demolition/sealing action qua the tower
in question in case application not filed by the
appellant within the stipulated period. Further
status report not filed in this regard.
Let further status report be filed
whether the appellant is using the tower on
05.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 387/13 & 388/13
06.06.2018
Present : Sh.Amit Sharma , counsel for the appellant.
Sh.Sandeep Manglik, counsel for the
respondent with Suresh Gaur/AE(B)
Status report filed stating that appellant
has applied for regularization on 21.12.2017
and his application is under process. In the
meantime on 02.05.2018 appellant has
applied for desealing of the property to rectify
the deviation/ unauthorized construction.
Put up for further status report/final
arguments on 02.11.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 43/18
06.06.2018
Present : Sh.Satender Sharma, counsel for the
appellant with Sh. Anil Verma, AR of the
appellant.
Sh.Sanjay Seth counsel for the respondent.
Adjournment sought for final arguments.
Put up for final arguments on 30.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 287/18 &288/18
06.06.2018
Present : Sh.S.D.Ansari, counsel for the appellant.
Sh. Dharamvir Gupta, counsel for the
respondent.
Due to heavy cause list and orders in various
matters today, no time left for dictating orders.
Put up for orders on 07.06.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 1092/15 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Anuj Garg, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Raj Bhushan, JLO from EDMC alongwith
Sh. D.P. Sharma, AE(B).
An application was moved for early hearing of the
matter because after dismissal of the regularization
application an appeal has been filed against the said order
which is listed on 16.08.2018.
It is further submitted that part demolition action has
already been taken on 03.05.2018. In case, respondent is
not restrained from carrying out demolition, appellant will
suffer irreparable loss and appeal filed by the appellant will
become infructuous.
Notice of the application be issued to the respondent.
Sh. Shashikant Sharma, counsel for MCD is not
present as he was out of station.
Adjournment sought on behalf of the respondent to
file reply of the application.
Put up this matter alongwith connected matter on
16.08.2018.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
no. D-8, Plot No. d-33, Gali No. 14, Bhajanpura, Shahdara,
Delhi till next date of hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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.
A.No. 1092/15 Copy of the affidavit will be provided to concerned
AE(B), 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 of status report, record by
the respondent on 16.08.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to both parties, as
prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 345/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Awijit Paliwal, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Nitin Prakash, counsel for MCD.
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.
Adjournment sought to file the reply and status report
as well as record.
Put up this matter for that purpose on 06.08.2018.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
no. II/406, Teliwara, Shahdara, Delhi-110032 in pursuance
of demolition order dated 14.05.2018 till next date of
hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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), 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.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to both parties, as
prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 327/18
06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Anshul Grover, counsel for appellant.
Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.
Memo of appearance on behalf of respondent filed.
Adjournment sought to produce the record and to file
status report as respondent was served only on 30.05.2018.
It is stated that the regularization application of the appellant
is pending with the respondent and IN has been issued to
which the reply is to be filed by the appellant.
Put up this matter for filing of status report and
producing record by the respondent on 11.09.2018.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
no. KP-174, Pitampura, Delhi in pursuance of demolition
order dated 16.03.2018 till next date of hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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), 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.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to both parties, as
prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 257/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Yogender Kumar, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against the demolition order dated
29.03.2018 alleging unauthorized construction in the form of
deviations in original allotted structure.
Ld. Counsel pointed out that after receiving the notice
the appellant has given reply to the show cause notice on
02.04.2018 stating that the construction in the property was
done in the year 2005 by the previous owner.
It is further pointed out that in the demolition order,
nothing is mentioned what are the deviations against the
allotted structure and as such the demolition order is
ambiguous and passed in mechanical manner.
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.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
flat no. 16 , LIG DDA Flat, Badarpur, Delhi in pursuance of
demolition order dated 29.03.2018 till next date of hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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), who shall verify whether details of construction
mentioned in the affidavit is correct or not.
A.No. 257/18 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 of status report, record by
the respondent on 12.10.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to counsel for
appellant, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 350/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Satyender Sharma, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Rajiv Garg, Nodal Officer for North DMC.
Memo of appearance of Sh. Dharamvir Gupta,
counsel for MCD filed.
This is an appeal against the demolition order dated
25.04.2018 alleging unauthorized construction in the shape
of deviations / excess coverage against standard plan of
DDA and extended ground floor.
In the appeal, the said order has been challenged on
the ground that the documents filed by the appellant in reply
to the show cause notice was not considered where it was
alleged that the construction was prior to 2007 and
appellant is paying the house tax of the said entire property
since 2007 and the property is protected under Delhi Laws
(Special Provisions) Act, 2011.
Ld. Counsel for appellant has placed on record rent
agreement dated 19.12.2005 between appellant and tenant
a bank manager where the details of the property is
mentioned in the offer of premises for officer’s residence in
column 15.
Ld. Counsel for appellant submitted that the structure
mentioned in the said offer is the only structure existing as
on today and no new structure has been raised.
Nodal Officer of MCD without filing any Vakalatnama
and reply has submitted that these documents i.e. rent
agreement was never placed before the Quasi Judicial
Authority when hearing was given before passing the
demolition order.
However, there is no denial of the genuineness of the
documents at this stage and the respondent is at liberty to
verify the genuineness or the correctness of these
documents from the bank concerned.
A.No. 350/18
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
no. 158-A, Pocket-GH-2, Ankur Apartment, Pashchim Vihar,
New Delhi in pursuance of demolition order dated
25.04.2018 till next date of hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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), 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 of status report and
producing record by the respondent on 10.10.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to both parties, as
prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 352/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Satyender Sharma, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Rajiv Garg, Nodal Officer for North DMC.
Memo of appearance of Sh. Dharamvir Gupta,
counsel for MCD filed.
This is an appeal against the demolition order dated
25.04.2018 whereas unauthorized construction in the shape
of deviations against standard DDA plan, changing the size
of bathroom and kitchen in open courtyard covering by tin
shed.
It is stated in the appeal of the appellant who is
present in the court today that he is an original allottee since
1989 and the alleged deviations which are permissible by
law is done in the year 1995 and as such the same are
protected under Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2011.
Adjournment sought to file the status report.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
no. 159-B, Pocket-GH-2, Ankur Apartment, Pashchim Vihar,
New Delhi in pursuance of demolition order dated
25.04.2018 till next date of hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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), who shall verify whether details of construction
mentioned in the affidavit is correct or not.
A.No. 352/18
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 of status report, record by
the respondent and arguments on 10.10.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to both parties, as
prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 351/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Satyender Sharma, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Rajiv Garg, Nodal Officer for North DMC.
Memo of appearance of Sh. Dharamvir Gupta,
counsel for MCD filed.
This is an appeal against the demolition order dated
25.04.2018 whereas unauthorized construction in the shape
of deviations / excess coverage against standard DDA plan
and extended at ground floor.
It is stated in the appeal of the appellant who is
present in the court today that he is an original allottee since
1989 and the alleged deviations which are permissible by
law is done in the year 1995 and as such the same are
protected under Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2011.
Adjournment sought to file the status report.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
no. 157-A, Pocket-GH-2, Ankur Apartment, Pashchim Vihar,
New Delhi in pursuance of demolition order dated
25.04.2018 till next date of hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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), who shall verify whether details of construction
mentioned in the affidavit is correct or not.
A.No. 352/18
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 of status report, record by
the respondent and arguments on 10.10.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to both parties, as
prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 311/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Ajay Kumar, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against the sealing order dated
08.05.2017 .
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 24.09.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 214/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Shirish Yaduvanshi, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against the sealing order dated
09.11.2017.
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 01.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 643/10 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Mohan K. Kukreja, counsel for appellant.
Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD.
Status report regarding decision on regularization
application not filed.
Adjournment sought to file the same.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and arguments on 10.10.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 182/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. M.S. Bhutalia, counsel for appellant.
Ms. Renu Soni, Nodal Officer for SDMC.
This is an appeal against the demolition order dated
28.06.2017 for alleged unauthorized construction at ground
floor and first floor in the property of the appellant bearing
Khasra No. 523, House no. 921, Harijan Basti, Near Water
Tank, Village Mahipalpur, Delhi.
At the very outset, it is submitted by the ld. Counsel
for appellant that notice does not pertain to the property of
the appellant because the property of the appellant as
recorded in various documents as House No. 521, Khasra
No. 921, Village Mahipalpur, Delhi.
It is further submitted that the property of the
appellant exists since 2006 and the electricity and water
meters were installed in the year 2006 and as such
protected under Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2011.
Notice was served upon the respondent. Status
report not filed.
Record is produced. Let the same be deposited with
the registry of this Tribunal.
It is submitted by Nodal Officer that the concerned
AE(B) will be present on next date of hearing for clarifying
the status of the property and the anomaly as pointed out by
the appellant.
Put up this matter for filing of detailed status report
with regard to contentions and submissions of counsel for
appellant also.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
house no. 521, Khasra No. 921, situated at Harijan Basti,
Near Old Water Tank, Extended Lal Dora, Village
Mahipalpur, New Delhi-110037 till next date of hearing.
A.No. 182/18 However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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), 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 on 12.10.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to both parties, as
prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 555/12 & 139/12 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. A.K. Trivedi, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for MCD in appeal
No.139/12.
Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for DDA in appeal
no. 139/12.
Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD in appeal
No. 555/12.
Sh. Kanwar Singh, Kanungo from DDA.
Sh. Raj Kumar, Kanungo from SDM Sarswati
Vihar.
On 16.02.2018, Tehsildar, SDM Sarswati Vihar has
submitted a letter dated 15.02.2018 of N.K. Engineers for
seeking additional time to carry out the demarcation on the
ground that after receiving the masavi of two villages
(Wazirpur & Sindhora Kalan) some technical discrepancy
was found The said Tehsildar further submitted that field
work of demarcation has already been done but N.K.
Engineers told that they required Masavi of village Wazipur
which might be lying in the record room.
Accordingly Incharges of Record Room Revenue
Sadar Kanungo Branch, Tis Hazari was directed to supply
the masavi of village Wazirpur and all other documents
sought by Tehsildar Saraswati Viuhar within one week as
further report is to be sent to the Hon’ble High Court
regarding proceedings of this case. The demarcation report
is ordered to be filed at least one week prior to the date
fixed i.e. 20.03.2018.
No steps have been taken by Tehsildar, Sarswati
Vihar. Sh. Raj Kumar, Kanugo appeared on behalf of SDM
Sarswati Vihar stated that the Sh. N.K. Engineers who was
engalged for carrying out demarcation has shown their
inability to do so for want of another point. There is no
satisfactory reply with regard to non compliance of the
directions dated 16.02.2018.
A.No. 555/12 & 139/12
Counsel for appellant submitted that demarcation of
the plot in question was done on the direction of this
Tribunal and thereafter field work was already completed
and the demarcation report was filed on 13.09.2012.
Ld. Counsel pointed out that the SDM/Tehsildar are
not following the directions of this Tribunal as well as
directions of the Hon’ble High Court issued in Writ Petition
(C) FNo.2717/2017 titled as Ram Kaur Vs DDA. The
Hon’ble High Court has also sought compliance of the
directions given by them on 24.03.2017.
On 10.10.2017, ld. Counsel for respondent has filed
copy of the noting whereby the approval was granted for
fresh demarcation by TSM method at the expenses of the
DDA. Accordingly the SDM concerned was directed to
conduct the demarcation on or before 06.11.2017.
As per the status report on 12.12.2017 the
demarcation through TSM Method could not be conducted
as the second point which was required to conduct the
demarcation through TSM Method could not be traced and
further the matter was fixed on 21.12.2017.
DDA/SDM was directed to file the demarcation report
on 22.12.2017.
The demarcation report was not filed on subsequent
dates.
On 04.01.2018 the Director of the DDA and SDM
Sarswati Vihar was directed to be present at the spot for the
purpose of carrying out demarcation and the matter was
adjourned for filing demarcation report and arguments on
16.02.2018.
On 16.02.2018 the report was not filed for the
reasons recorded by me in the beginning of the order.
Today no responsible officer from the DDA and from the
SDM office is present and no further status report filed
which shows that these officers are not serious about the
proceedings before this Tribunal as well as before Hon’ble
High Court of Delhi.
A.No. 555/12 & 139/12
Sh. Raj Kumar, Kanungo, SDM Saraswati Vihar
states that Massavi of Village Wazirpur was handed over to
N.K. Engineers in the month of March 2018. SDM
Saraswati Vihar, SDM Civil Lines alongwith concerned
Tehsildar are directed to appear in person and to file the
demarcation report, failing which necessary adverse orders
will be passed and the higher officers will be summoned.
Status report be sent to the Hon’ble High Court in
compliance of the Hon’ble High Court order.
Put up this matter for filing of status report by the
respondent and arguments on 11.07.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to all the parties for
presenting the same before concerned SDM and Tehsildar.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 942/16 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. S.D. Ansari, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Ashutosh Gupta, counsel for MCD.
An application has been moved for desealing of the
property for residential purpose.
Ld. Counsel for appellant submits that at this stage,
this application be considered for removal of essential
goods lying in the property in the application for desealing of
the property may be considered on regular hearing to be
fixed as early as possible.
At the request of ld. Counsel for appellant, put up this
matter for consideration and arguments on this application
on 03.07.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 936/17 & 800/17 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. S.D. Ansari, counsel for appellant.
Sh. Sanjay Sethi / Sh. H.R. Aggarwal, counsel
for MCD.
At the request of Ld. Counsel for appellant, put up
this matter for arguments on 03.07.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 268/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Amol Kokane, counsel for appellant.
File taken up today on an application for withdrawal
of the appeal.
Appellant has filed an appeal against the sealing
order and the property is already sealed and the matter is
listed for 08.06.2018.
Put up this matter alongwith connected appeal on
08.06.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 385/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. O.P. Verma, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against the demolition order dated
27.04.2018.
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. Record be deposited immediately in the Tribunal.
Put up this matter on 08.06.2018. Notice be given
Dasti, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 308/18 06.06.2018
Present : Ms. Slika, counsel for appellant.
File taken up today on an application for withdrawal
of the appeal.
Notice of the application be issued to the respondent
through its counsel Sh. V.K. Aggarwal for 07.06.2018.
Notice be given Dasti, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
M.No. 16/18 06.06.2018
Present : Appellant in person.
An application is moved for restoration of the appeal
which was dismissed on 15.12.2017.
Notice of the application be issued to the respondent
for 04.07.2018. Notice be given Dasti, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 372/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. G.R. Verma, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against the sealing action on
13.09.2017. No sealing notice or order placed. No proof to
show sealed premise filed.
Put up this matter for consideration / arguments on
maintainability of appeal on 08.08.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 238/18 & 239/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Gurusharan Singh, counsel for appellant.
These are two appeals against the demolition and
sealing order.
In the demolition order dated 30.11.2016 the alleged
unauthorized construction is in the shape of amalgamation
of two plots i.e. 29 & 30 with excess coverage and
deviations at ground floor and first floor and entire second
floor and two rooms one hall and temporary shed at third
floor including projections on municipal land at each floor.
It is submitted that in the separate appeal by the
owner of second floor has been granted interim protection
till 20.07.2018 in appeal no. 450/17.
The appellant is the owner of the property and in
possession of ground floor and has purchased the same in
the year 2006 and the alleged construction being old prior to
2006.
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.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
no. G-5/29-30, Ground Floor, Sector-11, Rohini, Delhi till
next date of hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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.
A.No. 238/18 & 239/18
Copy of the affidavit will be provided to concerned
AE(B), 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 of status report, record by
the respondent on 20.07.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to counsel for
appellant, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 366/18
06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Kunal Kalra, counsel for appellant alongwith
Sh. Vijay Kumar, Appellant no. 1, Sh. Sanjay
Chopra, Appellant no. 6, Sh. Harish Chander,
Appellant no. 2, Sh. Sarvjeet Singh, Appellant no.
4 in person and Sh. Deepak Son of Sh. Ram
Kishan Das, Appellant no. 3.
This is an appeal against the demolition order dated
10.05.2010 stating that the appellants are the tenants in the
property bearing no. X/2625, Gali No. 6, Raghubar Pura-2, Delhi.
It is pointed out that owner of the shops has filed an
appeal bearing no. 93/12 & 94/12 which are pending for
27.07.2018.
Ld. Counsel placed on record the order dated 08.01.2018
wherein counsel for appellant / owners of the premises / shops
has given no objection to the respondent execute the demolition
order stating that appellant cannot carry out demolition as
property was occupied by various tenants.
This Tribunal vide order dated 08.01.2018 directed the
respondent to execute the demolition order. It is submitted that
the said statement was given by the counsel for appellant
deliberately because property was occupied by the tenants and
they are regularly making the payments of the rent to the landlord
/ appellants in those appeals who duly received the same against
receipts even on today.
Ld. Counsel for appellant pointed out that appellant has
placed on record various receipts to show that the tenancy exists
much before 2006 and no unauthorized construction has been
done even by the tenants / landlord in the shops and above the
shops.
Ld. Counsel for appellant further pointed out that from the
photograph placed at page no. 149 of paper book to stress that
even from the naked eye it can be seen that the shops are very
old.
In view of the facts and circumstances, issue notice of the
appeal and application to the respondent through concerned
Chief Law Officer. AE(B) is directed to appear in person
A.No. 366/18
alongwith entire record of the proceedings, status report and
reply of the appeal on date fixed.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking any
coercive action in the shops of the appellant bearing no. Shop
No. 1 measuring 10 x 8, Shop No. 2 measuring 11.2 x 8, Shop
No. 3 measuring 13.4 x 8, Shop No. 4 measuing 38 x 8, Shop No.
5 measuring 16 x 8, Shop No. 7 measuring 11.6 x 8.5, Shop No.
8 measuring 12.5 x 11 and Shop No. 9 measuring 11.2 x 5.11
situated in the property bearing no. X/2625, Gali No. 6, Raghubar
Pura-2, Delhi in pursuance of demolition order dated 10.05.2010
till next date of hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order passed
by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court order in
respect of the property in question.
Appellants are directed to file separate affidavit with
regard to their shop 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),
who shall verify whether details of construction mentioned in the
affidavit is correct or not.
Appellants are 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 of status report, record by the
respondent on 27.07.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to counsel for appellant,
as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 1021/17 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Prashant Bhardwaj, counsel for SDMC
alongwith Ms. Renu Soni, Nodal Officer for
SDMC and Sh. Ashok Gupta, AE(B).
File taken up today on an application moved on
behalf of the respondent to return the original record for
compliance of the order dated 28.05.2018.
Heard.
Application is allowed.
Original record filed be returned to the respondent for
compliance of the order dated 28.05.2018 to be submitted
on next date of hearing.
Put up this matter for the date already fixed i.e.
19.07.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 378/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Saurabh Tiwari, counsel for appellant.
Fresh appeal filed against the demolition order dated
16.04.2018.
It is stated that possession of property in question
was handed over after litigation in the Hon’ble High Court
where a decree for possession was passed by Hon’ble High
Court vide order dated 28.03.2014 and the possession was
given in December,2016. As per the judgment of Hon’ble
High Court on record the possession of the property which
was handed over consists of 200 sq. yds. having 8 rooms,
one store room and two washrooms.
The position at present as shown in Annexure 8 is a
build up property at ground floor and first floor i.e. 82.91 sq.
mtrs. on ground floor and the same area at the first floor. At
the ground floor there are three bedrooms, kitchen, toilet,
basement, garage and public store. At the first floor there is
a big hall measuring 4.69 mtrs. x 15.76 mtrs.
This is an admitted case in the appeal that out of 200
sq. yards the property 100 sq. yards in the right side was
damaged by the unauthorized occupants and the same was
demolished by the appellant herself and 100 sq. yards is left
i.e. the remaining property. It is clear from the description
as well as in Annexure 8 that there is basement and hall at
the first floor which does not find mentioned in the Hon’ble
High Court order where possession of the 8 rooms was
handed over out of which 100 sq. yards is already
demolished.
Because of these reasons, I am not inclined to grant
ex-parte stay.
At this stage, ld. Counsel for appellant pointed out
that reply to the show cause notice dated 03.04.2018 was
duly replied vide reply dated 17.04.2018 and reply does not
find mentioned in the demolition order dated 18.04.2018.
A.No. 378/18 It is therefore, submitted that principles of natural
justice has not been followed and the demolition order has
been passed in mechanical manner without considering the
reply.
I have read the reply placed at page 34 which simply
states that property was an old house and no new
construction has been carried out, however, the said reply
seems to be contrary to the existing status of the property
as find mentioned in the site plan Annexure 8 with the
appeal and as recorded earlier by me.
Ld. Counsel for appellant further submitted that in the
vacation notice less than 12 hours were given, at least, 24
hours are required to be given and the vacation notice has
been given in the wrong name.
The notice u/s 435 of the DMC Act seeking consent
of the occupants was also issued in the name of wrong
person.
It is therefore, submitted that the property needs to
be protected for hearing of the appeal and ex-parte stay be
granted.
I have considered those points also.
In view of my earlier observations regarding existing
structure which does not tally with the property as was
received in pursuance to the decree passed by the Hon’ble
High Court of Delhi, I am not inclined to grant ex-parte stay.
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 07.08.2018.
Copy of order be given Dasti, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 198/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. Arjun Dewan, counsel for appellant.
Sh. V.K. Aggarwal, counsel for MCD alongwith
Sh. A.S. Meena, AE(B).
Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent filed.
Record produced. Let the same be deposited with
the registry of this Tribunal.
Copy of the affidavit filed by the respondent in the
Hon’ble High Court filed stating that it could be considered
as status report regarding the present appeal.
Ld. Counsel for appellant pointed out that this
affidavit has been filed by the respondent in the Hon’ble
High Court on 21.05.2018 when the matter was heard by
the Hon’ble High Court and all the points raised by the
respondent regarding maintainability of the petition and the
action against the property argued by Sh. Gaurang Kanth
Ld. Counsel for respondent. On behalf of petitioner Sh.
Sanjay Jain, Ld. Senior Counsel submitted before the
Hon’ble High Court that construction on the ground and first
floor was prior to 2006 and in view of the Delhi Laws
(Special Provisions) Act the petitioners are entitled for
protection.
It was further submitted that the demolition order has
never been served upon the petitioners and service of
vacation order without service of vacation notice is bad in
law.
Ld. Counsel for respondent has stated that before the
Hon’ble High Court while disputing the contention of ld.
Counsel for appellant regarding non-service of the
demolition order dated 02.06.2016, it was also submitted
that the construction on the ground floor as well as on the
first floor was made after 2007 i.e. after the cut-off date
necessary for the protection. After considering the
arguments of both the Ld. Counsels for respondent and
A.No. 198/18
appellant the Hon’ble High Court directed the respondent
EDMC to file an affidavit placing on record the submissions
which were advanced by ld. Counsel for respondent on their
behalf and matter was listed for re-notification on
23.03.2018.
Ld. Counsel for appellant submitted that copy of
affidavit which has been placed before this Tribunal has
been filed on 21.03.2018 when the matter was again
notified and thereafter on 04.05.2018 the parties were
directed to produce this order for perusal and consideration
of this Tribunal.
Ld. Counsel for respondent states that respondent
will be filing the status report also with regard to the
contention and the ground taken in the appeal.
Ld. Counsel for respondent at the very outset
submitted that no application seeking condonation of delay
in filing an appeal against the demolition order dated
02.06.2016 has been filed and as such ld. Counsel has
taken objection to the maintainability of the appeal itself.
To that contention ld. Counsel for appellant has
submitted that in view of the provisions of section 343(2) of
the DMC Act there was no necessity seeking condonation of
delay as there was no occasion for the appellant to file the
appeal against the said order unless and until it came into
their knowledge by the receiving the vacation notice and the
appellant has filed appeal within the period of limitation from
the service of vacation notice.
All these contentions will be considered by this
Tribunal when detailed status report is to be filed by the
respondent.
The matter be listed for arguments on 20.08.2018.
In the meantime, respondent is restrained from taking
any coercive action in the property of the appellant bearing
no. 323/1A, Block D (Old No. 229/A) Near Rehmat Masjid,
A.No. 198/18
Sangam Vihar, Delhi in pursuance of demolition order dated
16.04.2018 till next date of hearing.
However, this order is subject to any other order
passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court / Hon’ble High Court
order 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), 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 on 20.08.2018.
Copy of the order be given Dasti to counsel for
appellant, as prayed.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 1086/15 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. S.K. Bhardwaj, counsel for appellant
alongwith appellant.
Sh. Mohit Sharma, counsel for MCD.
Ld. Counsel for respondent has already placed on
record the order of Civil Court dated 19.11.2017 and
03.11.2017.
The condonation will be heard and the matter will be
perused on 23.07.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 371/18 06.06.2018
Present : Sh. A.N. Shukla, counsel for appellant.
This is an appeal against the demolition order dated
10.01.2017 which came into the knowledge of appellant on
28.01.2017 when property was demolished.
Put up this matter for arguments on maintainability on
appeal on 23.07.2018.
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. 06.06.2018
Present :
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. Statement of Sh. ON SA
RO&AC
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. Statement of Sh. ON SA
RO&AC
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. Statement of Sh. ON SA
RO&AC
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. Statement of Sh. ON SA
RO&AC
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. Statement of Sh. ON SA
RO&AC
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018
A.No. Statement of Sh. ON SA
RO&AC
(RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) AD&SJ-cum-P.O.
Appellate Tribunal:MCD 06.06.2018