SC refuses staying sealing of commercial complexes

New Delhi, Apr 3: The Supreme Court today refused to stay the on-going sealing process against the commercial establishments operating from residential areas in Delhi.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Y K Sabharwal and Justice C K Thakker, however, extended the time for filing of affidavits of undertaking till April 7.

The order for extention of time came after a bunch of applications filed by the traders whose premises had been sealed due to non-filing of affidavits earlier.

The court directed in case the traders filed an affidavit of undertaking saying that they will stop the misuse on or before June 30, the Monitoring Committee may consider re-opening of the seal and water and electricity supply will be restored forthwith.

Tightening the noose against the corrupt officials, the Supreme Court directed that MCD would provide a web site where the traders can lodge a complaint against an officer demanding illegal gratification. The court also directed the MCD to file applications against traders who break the seal so that they may be prosecuted for willful disobediance of the court orders.

The court warned that such action shall be viewed seriously and none shall be spared and it was the duty of the MCD to bring any such violation to the notice of the court.

Reacting to the MCD council submission that MCD has already filed FIRs against those breaking the seals, the court said ''we know FIRs take their own time''.

In terms of the apex court order dated March 24, those filing false affidavits would be prosecuted for the offenses of perjury and contempt of the Supreme Court. As per the order, the sealing of the commercial premises is to take place on 189 roads having 80 feet width.

Earlier on March 28, the Centre brought a notification permitting mixed land use on the ground floor in the residential areas while the sealing process began on March 29. The court on Friday had taken exception to the conduct of the Centre and held the government as well as the MCD responsible for deliberately creating confusion to circumvent the order of the apex court dated March 24.

UNI