SC stays action under Delhi Laws Act against illegal constructions

New Delhi, Aug 1: The Supreme Court today admitted the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Delhi Laws (special provisions) Act 2006, putting one year's moratorium against removal of unauthorised constructions and also suspending action against commercial establishments for operating from residential areas in the national capital.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Y K Sabharwal and justices C K Thakkar and P K Balasubramanyan while granting ten days time to Union Urban Development Ministry to prepare its response to a plea from interim stay against the operation of the impugned Act adjourned the hearing till August 10, 2006.

The court also directed the amicus curae Ranjit Kumar to discuss the issue with the members of monitoring committee appointed by it as well as with former Lieutenant Governor of Delhi PK Dave.

It took serious view of the part of the government notification dated May 20, 2006, saying that those who have filed an affidavit of undertaking in the court stating that they would stop the misuse by June 30, 2006, may continue the commercial activities for one year with effect from May 19, 2006.

The court also took note of the part of the notification to which its attention was drawn by wing commander (retired) Satya Prakash who stated that the notification was violative of article 14 of the constitution as special provision is sought to be made for affluent colonies while different set of rules is sought to be made for colonies inhabitated by the middle class.

On the plea for interim stay of the impugned act, the court said ''we are not inclined to say 'No stay' or 'complete stay'. We are talking of the middle path''.

While admitting the petition, the court in its order said ''serious challenge has been made to the constitutional validity of Delhi laws (special provisions) Act 2006. One of the grounds of challenges is that it amounts to legislative overruling by the legislature. Having heard the counsel for the parties, we are of the view that many serious questions of laws sought to be raised which require deeper consideration and elaborate submission. In this view we admit the petition and issue the ruling.

The next question is of the interim directions besides we have heard and our attention has also been drawn to the report of Tajinder Khanna committee of experts apponted by the government to look into various aspects of illegal constructions.

The said report dated May 30, 2006 reference is also being made to the setting up of the committee. We have also perused the notification dated May 20, 2006 issued by Union Urban Development Ministry issuing directions, one of it being that all commercial activities may continue for one year with effect from May 19, 2006 despite the affidavit of undertaking having been filed in the court.

Responding to the contention of Solicitor General G E Vahanvati that the legislation has been passed unanimously by parliament, the chief justice retorted''we are not concerned with the unanimity in parliament. We will examine the constitutional validity of the impugned act,there are many acts which have been passed unanimously.''

UNI