(Inserting last para)

New Delhi, May 23 (UNI) The Supreme Court today refused to stay the operation of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2006 putting one year's moratorium against demolition of unauthorised constructions and sealing of commercial establishments operating from residential areas in the Capital.

A vacation bench comprising Mr Justice Arijit Pasayat and Mr Justice RV Raveendran, however, decided to examine the constitutional validity of the Act and issued notices to the respondents including the Centre and Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD).

The notices were issued on a PIL filed by Citizen's Voice, an NGO, and Delhi Residents' Welfare Associations' Joint Front.

The court directed that the matter be listed for hearing on July 17 before the bench already hearing the case related to the demolition and sealing of commercial establsihments operating from residential areas in the city.

The court also recorded the statement of the petitioners' counsel that he would move an appropriate application by tomorrow to rectify the defect with regard to the challenge to the bill which has now become an Act after having been notified by the Government.

Earlier, the court wanted to know whether the legislature was competent to undo the judgement of a court while clarifying that in the present case the impugned Act has been enacted only to upset the interlocutory orders which are not judgments.

Earlier, the petitioners' counsel Jasbir Malik and R L Panjwani pleaded that the impugned Act was an attempt by parliamentarians to defeat the order passed by the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court for removal of illegal construction made by ''builders mafia in collusion with MCD officials.'' The counsel pleaded for an order of status quo on the grounds that the impugned Act will benefit the violators and offenders of law at the cost of law abiding citizens.

The petitioners also contended that the present law which protected the illegal constructions made upto January 1, 2006 for a year was contrary to the provisions of the MCD Act.

The petitioners said that the apex court had the power to make judicial review of any law made by Parliament in violation of the provisions of the Constitution of India and argued that the present Act was a flagrant violation of Article 14 of the Constitution as it protected the violators of law who broke the law upto January 1, 2006 but made the offenders of law after that date liable for prosecution.

The petitioners have also pleaded that the demolition of jhuggis and slums, which were clear encroachment on public land, have also been put in abeyance for a year.

The petitioners also asked how an action (illegal constructions and encroachments on public land) which is void can be given the protection of law.

The Act has been enacted by the Central government to amend Delhi Master Plan to regularise unauthorised constructions in the city as well as to permit the mixed land use for continuation of commercial establishments operating from residential areas. The MCD has already stopped demolition and sealing drive in Delhi and the process of desealing the premises sealed under the SC orders has started from today itself.

The impugned Act, however, makes it clear that there shall be no protection to the encroachers on public land and according to the Government, the Act was aimed at protecting large number of people against the harassment and difficulties caused by large-scale demolition and sealing of premises. The Government has also given a ray of hope to those whose premises have already been demolished by assuring them that the Government shall help them in getting loans if their premises are covered under the protection provided by the new Master Plan which shall be in place within a year.

UNI AKS/SC SHR JN