SUDHA TANEJA & ANR Vs. MCD AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have not taken any steps for service of the respondent no.3. The counsel for the petitioners seeks an adjournment to serve the respondent no.3. However the respondent no.2 DDA has filed a counter affidavit in W.P.(C) No.3632/2010 and in view whereof need is not felt to await the service of the private respondent no.3 and the counsel for the petitioners has been heard on the writ petition.

(2.) W.P.(C) No.4423/2010 has been filed by an Association of space buyers in a Mall constructed by the respondent no.3 builder/developer at Plot No.8, Community Shopping Centre, Sector 9, Rohini, Delhi. W.P.(C) No.3632/2010 has been filed by one of the space buyers. The issues involved in the two writ petitions being identical, they are being taken up together for consideration.

(3.) The petitioners in both the writ petitions complain of unauthorized construction by the builder/developer in the Mall and seek direction to the respondents no.1 & 2 MCD and DDA respectively to demolish the unauthorized construction by the builder/developer in the basement of the Mall and to ensure that the basement of the Mall is retained for the purposes of parking and other facilities only. In W.P.(C) No.4423/2010 filed by the Association, additional reliefs,