Response
Actually, you were booked under MCD for illegal construction after MCD officials visited you, and you had to pay a fine for the cancellation of the booking, as well as an undertaking not to construct it without a properly sanctioned plan.
Furthermore, if a property is booked for illegal construction, it can easily be found on the net list of booked properties for that area’s illegal construction.
It is a completely unjustified and illegal method of MCD.
The reason for the demolition must be stated in a notice or other form of correspondence.
If the same has not been done, we can file a lawsuit in court for damages and an injunction if the house was built within the parameters and was not extended.
We can also pursue criminal charges against MCD officials who are corrupt.
Yes, MCD has issued a proper demolition notice.
The NHRC considers the South MCD’s demolition of a building without prior notice to be illegal. A show cause notice is issued to the building owner before any unauthorised construction is demolished, giving him the opportunity to show that his construction is not illegal.
When a court of law orders the demolition of a structure, this is an exception.
In addition, the municipal corporation’s notice provides the affected person with the opportunity and time to seek a stay order from the court.
Now that the properties have been demolished, the only legal recourse available is to take the corporation to court and seek damages for the losses incurred as a result of the demolition.
Reference: THE DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1957
Section 343. Order of demolition and stoppage of buildings and works in certain cases and appeal.Ñ(1) Where the erection of any building or execution of any work has been commenced, or is being carried on, or has been completed without or contrary to the sanction referred to in section 336 or in contravention of any condition subject to which such sanction has been accorded or in contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or bye-laws made thereunder, the Commissioner may, in addition to any other action that may be taken under this Act, make an order directing that such erection or work shall be
demolished by the person at whose instance the erection or work has been commenced or is being carried on or has been completed, within such period, (not being less than five days and more than fifteen days from the date on which a copy of the order of demolition with a brief statement of the reasons therefor has been delivered to that person), as may be, specified in the order of demolition:
Provided that no order of demolition shall be made unless the person has been given by means of a notice served in such manner as the Commissioner may think fit, a reasonable opportunity of showing cause why such order shall not be made:
Provided further that where the erection or work has not been completed, the Commissioner may by the same order or by a separate order, whether made at the time of the issue of the notice under the first proviso or at any other time, direct the person to stop the erection or work until the expiry of the period within which any appeal against the order of demolition, if made, may be preferred under sub-section (2).
(2) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Commissioner made under sub-section (1) may prefer an appeal against the order to the Appellate Tribunal] within the period specified in the order for the
demolition of the erection or work to which it relates.
(3) Where an appeal is preferred under sub-section (2) against an order of demolition, [the Appellate Tribunal may, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 347C,] stay the enforcement of that order on such terms, if any, and for such period, as it may think fit
202100352-20210042-17670
LAWAYZ-2023-211
