SOHAN PAL MITTAL Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these Civil Writ Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India it is prayed that a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction be issued for quashing the complaints and the entire proceedings pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House, New Delhi.

(2.) We have heard Mr. P.N. Lekhi Sr. Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R. Mohanty, Advocate, learned counsel for Respondents No.3 and 4 as also Mr. O.P. Saxena, Advocate, learned counsel for Respondents No.5 and 6.

(3.) Perusal of the complaints under Section 14 read with Section 29 (2) of the Delhi Development Act, 1957, filed by Delhi Development Authority (DDA), shows that the Petitioners in WP(C) No.4193/1995 are owners of the property No. A-1, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi and Petitioners in WP(C) No.2830/2001 are the tenants. It is alleged in the complaints that the owners and tenants have put the property to non-conforming use by permitting running of an office, although the building could be used only for residential purposes according to the master plan/zonal development plan of Zone G-2. It is averred that previous sanction under Section 49 of the Delhi Development Act had been obtained vide resolution No.137 dated 15.7.1978, before filing the complaints.