Final Order 8

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: MCD APPL 1/25
IRSHAD MALIK Vs. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF
DELHI
03.02.2026
Present: Sh. Amrik Singh, Ld. Counsel for the appellant with
appellant.
Sh. Vijay Tyagi, Ld. Counsel for the respondent on
VC.
Sh. Shubham, JE from MCD Shahdara Zone.
Arguments on the appeal heard.
The present appeal arises out of the impugned order of the
Ld. ATMCD dated 23.05.25 where the appellant approached
against the show-cause notice of the MCD dated 20.06.2023 and
demolition order dated 05.07.2023. The said appeal was
dismissed vide the impugned order holding that there was a delay
of more than 500 days in filing the appeal.
Thus, there was no finding on the merits and facts but the
appeal was dismissed only on the ground of limitation.
The contention of the appellant is that the property in
question is situate in Khasra No. 347, whereas the demolition
order was passed in respect of property situate in khasra no.
386/1 and 387/1. It is further informed that a civil suit was
pending in the competent court of law while the said demolition
order was passed wherein MCD was also a party. In the said suit,
a demarcation report was also filed by the SDM confirming that
the property of the appellant is situate in khasra no. 347 and both
the khasra are quite different.
Contd…
-- 1 of 2 --
-2-
Without waiting for the adjudication of the dispute, the
MCD carried out the action. Though it is claimed by the MCD
that even the structure raised by the appellant on his property was
without any sanction plan but the documents reveal that the
demolition order mentions the khasra no. 386/1 & 387/1 and not
khasra no. 347. Hence, a reasonable apprehension arises
regarding the validity of the demolition order.
Even if it is assumed that the appellant was served with a
notice and he was well aware about it, but since the dispute is
regarding the identification of the property, the dispute requires
to be adjudicated on merits.
Hence, in the peculiar circumstances, the delay in filing the
appeal by the appellant before the Ld. ATMCD is condoned
without prejudice to the rights of the parties to contest on merits
before the said court.
Accordingly, the impugned order dated 23.05.25 of the Ld.
ATMCD is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Ld.
Court for disposal of the appeal of the appellant on merits
preferably within three months from the date of this order.
Appeal file be consigned to Record Room. TCR be sent
back to Ld. Trial Court alongwith a copy of this order.
(SANJAY SHARMA-I)
Principal District & Sessions Judge,
North-East District, KKD, Delhi/03.02.2026
-- 2 of 2 --