Delhi High Court - Orders
Rajesh Katyal vs Union Of India & Ors on 23 August, 2021
Author: Najmi Waziri
Bench: Najmi Waziri
$~3
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 7251/2021, CM APPL. 22861/2021 & CM APPL.
22862/2021
RAJESH KATYAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr A.K. Singla, Senior Advocate
with Mr Akshit Sachdeva, Advocate.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Jitesh Vikram Srivastava. SPC
along with Mr. Prajesh Vikram
Srivastava, Advocate for R-1.
Mr Rajesh Kumar Agnihotri,
Advocate for R-2.
Mr. Akhil Mittal, SC for North MCD.
Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, SC for DDA.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
ORDER
% 23.08.2021 The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
1. This matter could not be taken up on 20.08.2021 as the same was declared a holiday on account of "Muharram".
2. The petitioner in this petition seeks the following reliefs:
"...(i) issue writ of mandamus thereby declaring that the petitioner's shop being Shop No.7, Hans Cinema situated at G.T. Karnal Road, Azadpur, Delhi-110033 as part of Local Shopping Centre of aforesaid complex as per MPD-2021 and the respondent be directed to recognize and confirm to the same.
(ii) issue writ of mandamus directing respondents No. 1 to 4 to declare petitioner's shop being Shop No.7, Hans Cinema situated at G.T. Karnal Road, Azadpur, Delhi-110033, is Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.08.2021 13:45:48 eligible to commercial use, being part of authorized and regularized commercial complex (cinema/multiplex) namely Hans Cinema earlier known as Vijay Cinema situated at G.T. Karnal Road, Azadpur, Delhi-110033, and restraining such respondents from denying aforesaid status of petitioner's premises/Hans Cinema compound..."
3. The learned Standing Counsel for the DDA states, upon instructions, that the DDA has already responded vide letter dated 24.11.2020 in terms of Annexure-D (page 39) to the queries of one Mr Sonu Katyal (petitioner‟s brother), who had also sought the same clarification/relief from the DDA as sought in this petition. The said letter, inter alia, states as under
"...After hearing the persons appeared before the Board and the careful consideration of the summary report. Board recommends the following:
1. As DDA has not permitted any case for change of land use of any individual premise having private land ownership, therefore, in this specific case also land is privately owned, where change of land use is proposed from Residential to Commercial (Cinema) requires prior approval from MOUD.
2. Permitting the commercial components besides allowing the multiplex would generate the traffic in the area, therefore, it would require prior approval from Delhi Police, MCD, Fire Deptt. etc.
3. As per notified Zonal plan of Zone C under clause (1.0) --
"Land use indicated in the Zonal Development Plan will not give automatic right to the owners to use their property/land for the designated use." The plot should be part of layout, therefore, it is necessary that plot either is part of layout or it is to be integrated with residential area.
4. The proposed site is either part of the Mehendru Enclave which is an unauthorised colony or it is just touching to Ihc boundary of unauthorised colony./This colony is not even under consideration for its regularisation, and there are Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.08.2021 13:45:48 representations not to process change of land use of cinema plot without regularization of Mahendru Enclave.
5. The Board also recommends to check the area of plot and its ownership, and if at any stage of time, the ownership of the plot has changed.
6. The provisions of the cinematography Act should also be considered alongwith the permissible seal capacity in different sizes of the cinema hall In view of above. Board did not agree for the change of land use at this stage..."
4. According to the learned counsel for DDA, the matter is still under active consideration and it is expected that some policy decision will be taken in the near future. She submits that some documents need to be supplied by the petitioner; a letter in this regard was written on 17.08.2020, a copy whereof has been made available to the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner for doing the needful.
5. Let the DDA shall hear the petitioner within two weeks, through VC, through counsel as well, regarding his claim and a reasoned order passed shall be communicated to the petitioner, in three weeks thereafter. It will be open to the petitioner to pursue his remedies as may be available to him as per law.
6. The petition, along with pending applications, stands disposed-off in terms of the above.
7. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.
NAJMI WAZIRI, J AUGUST 23, 2021/rd Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:KAMLESH KUMAR Signing Date:24.08.2021 13:45:48