M.C.MEHTA versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2017] 12 S.C.R. 467 · Decided: 15-12-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MADAN B. LOKUR, DEEPAK GUPTA · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] 12 S.C.R. 467 
M.C.MEHTA 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
IN RE: VISHVJYOTI OVERSEAS (P) LTD. & ORS. 
(I.A. Nos. 93010 and 93007 of 2017 in 
Writ Petition (C) No. 4677 of 1985) 
DECEMBER 15, 2017 
[MADAN B. LOKUR AND DEEPAK GUPTA, JJ.] 
Urban Development: 
A 
B 
c 
Misuse of residential premises for commercial purposes in 
Delhi - In violation of various laws including municipal laws, 
Master Plan etc. and environmental laws - Supreme Court 
constituted Monitoring Committee directing them to seal the 
residential premises which. were being used for commercial purposes 
D 
- Some of those who were misusing the premises were given time to 
make alternative arrangement - To get over the orders passed by 
Supreme Court, Delhi Development Authority (DDA) modified the 
master plan of Delhi as regards the chapter on mixed land-use -
~ 
Thereafter, Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2006 was enacted 
- Pursuant thereto Celltral Government issued a Notification which 
E 
provided that any premises sealed in pursuance of a judgment, orders 
or decree of any court after 1.1.2006, would be eligible to be 
restored for. a period of one year - By the time the Act was enacted 
and Notification was issued, 5006 commercial establishments had 
already been sealed and 40,814 affidavits had been received by F 
the Monitoling Committee stating that misuse would be stopped by 
30.6.2006 - Provisions of the Act and the Notification were also 
challenged as unconstitutional - The court stayed the directions in 
the Notification opining that they amou11ted to over-ruling the orders 
and directions issued by Supreme Court - DDA thereafter amended 
the Master Plan notifying 2002 patches/streets for mixed use by 
G 
Notification dated 7.9.2006 - Supreme Court granted partial stay 
of the Notificatio11 - This court further restrained the Central 
Government and other authorities from issuing an)! other 
notification for conversion of residential premises to commercial 
use, except with the leave of Supreme Court - Supreme Court H 
467 
468 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 12 S.C.R. 
transferred all the cases pertaining to challenge to the Delhi Laws 
Act and subsequent legislations on the same subject - With regard 
to sealing orders at the instance of the Monitoring committee, the 
Court directed that !As filed before Supreme Court for de-sealing 
the premises was to be treated as statutory appeals and would stand 
transferred to statutory Appellate Tribunal and 30 days time was · 
given to file further I.As for de-sealing - Present applications were 
filed seeking permission of the court to file an appeal before statutory 
Appellate Tribunal against the sealing order beyond the granted 
time of 30 days - Held: The applicants are keen to utilise the premises 
for residential purpose - Their formal appeal before Appellate 
Tribunal would not serve any purpose - Therefore, it is directed 
that the premises be de-sealed for residential purposes, subject to 
certain conditions - Henceforth, it will not be necessary for any 
person whose residential premises has been sealed, to file appeal 
before Statutory Appellate Tribunal - The person can directly 
approach the Monitoring Committee for relief after depositing an 
amount of Rs. 1,00,0001- with the Monitoring Committee - The 
petitions which were transferred to High court, are withdrawn for 
expeditious hearing. 
Disposing of the applications, the Court 
HELD: 1. It seems that the applicants are keen to utilise 
the premises in question for residential purposes, as stated in 
their application. That being the position, it would hardly serve 
any purpose if the applicants are required to formally file an appeal 
before the Appellate Tribunal which is apparently already dealing 
with a very large number of appeals. It would, therefore, be in 
the fitness of things to de-seal the premises in question for 
residential purposes subject to certain conditions. [Para 34] [484-
D-E] 
2. Following conditions would meet the ends of justice and 
also provide a safeguard against possible misuse of residential 
G premises for commercial (non-industrial) purposes: 
(1) The applicants will file an affidavit before the 
Monitoring Committee stating that they will use the premises in 
question only for residential purposes and for no other purpose 
whatsoever. The applicants will identify the persons for whose 
H residential use the premises in question are sought to be 
M.C. MEHTA v. UNION OF I

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.