The counsel highlighted that the MCD was responsible of “talking in two voices.”
It was submitted that the company’s personal Public Well being Division had granted the institution a legitimate well being commerce licence on July 14, expressly allowing it to function an “Consuming Institution (20 to 50 seats)” at the exact same premises until December 31.
Subsequently, the Constructing Division couldn’t concurrently model the very same permitted exercise as actionable misuse warranting coercive closure.
The plea additional identified that any abstract sealing would unlawfully imperil the livelihood of almost 40 workers and disrespect the protecting provisions accessible below the Nationwide Capital Territory of Delhi Legal guidelines (Particular Provisions) Second Act, 2011, in addition to the mixed-use framework governing city villages like Saidulajab.
After listening to the submissions, the Courtroom recorded that a chance should be afforded to the petitioner to position its case on file earlier than any coercive measures are initiated.
Advocate Amit George, together with advocates Abhinav Jagannathan, Rajnish Kumar Jha, Nishant Shrivastava and Tanushree Gupta appeared for the petitioner.
Advocate Shivam Sachdeva represented the Municipal Company of Delhi.
[Read Order]
