Bom. HC: Maharashtra Govt Criticized for Exhibiting Mindset to Curtail Liberty of Undertrials  ||  Ori. HC: Stay of Execution Proceedings Under Arbitration Act Governed by Provisions of CPC  ||  SC: Intricate Enquiry Whether Claims are Time Barred Must Not be Conducted by Referral Courts  ||  Mad. HC: Proposed Changes in Criminal Laws Could have been Brought Through Amendments  ||  Bom. HC: Govt’s Decision to Exempt Pvt. Schools From 25% RTE Quota 'Unconstitutional'  ||  Ker. HC: To Proceed Against an Offence Committed Partly in India, Sanction of Centre Not Required  ||  Del. HC: Court to Take up Matter Referred to Arbitral Tribunal if Urgency Occurs  ||  Guj. HC: Asking Unknown Woman her Name, Address Doesn’t Constitute Sexual Harassment  ||  SC: In Cases of Long Incarceration, Watali Judgement Cannot be Cited as a Precedent  ||  Kerala HC: BNSS to be Applicable in all Criminal Appeals after 1st July, 2024    

Suraj Bhan Chauhan Vs. South Delhi Municipal Corporation - (High Court of Delhi) (20 Jul 2021)

Before making any order under Section 338 DMC Act, the Commissioner shall give reasonable opportunity to the person affected

MANU/DE/1332/2021

Civil

Petitioner impugns order whereby the respondent Corporation has revoked the sanctioned building plan under Section 338 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (DMC Act). The Petitioner submits that, no show cause notice was ever served on the Petitioner. He submits that, a show cause notice dated 4th June, 2021 was served on the architect and from the architect, the Petitioner got to know of the same and accordingly sent a reply, however, the impugned order records that, no reply to the said show cause notice has been received till then despite passage of stipulated time. The Petitioner submits that, no hearing as mandated under Section 338 of the DMC Act has been granted to the Petitioner.

Proviso to Section 338 of the DMC Act mandates that before making any order under Section 338 of DMC Act, the Commissioner shall give reasonable opportunity to the person affected, as to why such order should not be made.

In the present case, the show cause notice dated 4th June, 2021 is alleged to have been sent to the Petitioner. The Petitioner has filed a reply to the show cause notice which was received in the office of the SDMC on 18.06.2021 and specifically stated that notice has not been served upon him and he got to know of the same from the architect.

However, the impugned order records that no reply to the show cause notice has been received which clearly establishes that the reply given by the Petitioner has not been taken into account at the time of passing the impugned order. Accordingly, there is ex facie breach of the principles of natural justice as mandated by Section 338 of the DMC Act. On this count alone, order cannot be sustained. Impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the Respondents to pass a fresh speaking order on the show cause notice dated 4th June, 2021 after giving an opportunity of a hearing to the Petitioner. Petition is disposed off.

Tags : PRINCIPLES   NATURAL JUSTICE   BREACH  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved