No sealing in Delhi till Oct 31: Supreme Court

New Delhi, Sep 29: Giving an early Diwali gift to the majority of about five lakh traders in Delhi, the Supreme Court today directed the authorities to suspend sealing of the commercial establishments operating from residential areas in the city till October 31.

A Division Bench, headed by Chief Justice Y K Sabharwal, however, made it clear that the sealing process in respect of those traders, who are not covered by the impugned notifications dated September 7 and 15 and have not filed affidavits, should continue.

Describing Delhi as a classical case of flagrant violation of municipal laws, town planning laws and norms, master plans and environmental laws, the court restrained the respondents, including the Union government, DDA, Delhi government, MCD and NDMC, from issuing any further notifications without prior permission of the court.

The authorities, who have filed affidavits of undertaking and have taken the benefit of extension of time, should stop the misusers by October 31.

The court also exempted from sealing the 22 trades of daily residential needs subject to the condition that they get themselves registered with the authorities concerned latest by December 31.

The list of exempted category include vegetable/fruits/flowers, bakery items, confectionary shops, kirana/general stores, chemist shops laundary drycleaning, ironing shops, atta chakki, LPG booking office/showroom without LPG cylinder, stationery/books/gifts/book binding, photostat, fax/std/pco, photo studio, tailoring shops, optical shops, electrical/electronic repair shops, sweet shops/tea stalls without seating arrangements, meat poultry and fish shops, paan shops, cyber cafe/call phone booths, dairy products, cable tv/ DTH operations, hoisery/ readymade garments / cloth shops and ATM.

The court made it clear that small shops cannot be larger than 20 sqm area.

Traders, who have been protected by the impugned notifications, should give undertakings to the monitoring committee on or before November 10 that misusers should be stopped as per the directions of this court if the act is invalidated and/or the notification is quashed. The undertaking should also include that the trade is being conducted in respect of the permissible items and only in that part of the premises in which commercial activities are now permitted as per the impugned notification dated September 7 and 15.

Taking exception to the conduct of the government in issuing notifications to nullify the orders of this court from time to time, the court said, ''There cannot be any doubt that the legislature would lack competence to extend the time planted by this court in the purported exercise of law-making power. That would be virtually exercising judicial functions. Such functions donot vest in the legislature. In fact those who gave undertakings are already in breach of the undertakings by not stopping misuser by June 30. The dignity and authority of the court has to be protected not for any individual but for maintainence of the rule of law.'' The court directed the matter to be listed for further directions in November.

Regarding the professionals, including doctors, lawyers, chartered accountants and architects, the court took notice of the statement made by government counsel Indira Jaisingh that she will have it examined by the government and, if required, necessary corrections will be made.

The Common Court Society, headed by Former Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, has been permitted to intervene in the matter.

The court, while admitting the petition challenging the notification, directed the monitoring committee to consider the cases of those whose premises have been sealed under the orders of this court on merits and make appropriate reports to the court on consideration whereof necessary directions may be issued.

The court also directed the government to start the process of planning without any further loss of time in consultation with the monitoring committee. The sealing should be carried out in a planned manner and not haphazardly.

The court also took note of the contention of former Delhi Chief Secretary Omesh Sehgal that inviting objection and grant of hearing by the authorities was a farce since a decision has already been made to amend master plans even before inviting objections and the modification of an already expired master plan was not permissible.

The other two judges on the bench were Justice C K Thakker and Justice Raveendran.

UNI

Related Stories