W.P.(C)/16351/2025 of NEERAJ KUMAR CHOPRA Vs MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ANR. on 17 September 2026

O R D E R

%

17.09.2026

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed, inter alia, seeking appropriate directions to the Respondents for restoration of the Petitioner to his alleged original Tehbazari site at Site No. 11806, Ward No. 165, PVR Complex near Police Booth, Basant Lok, New Delhi.

3. On the last date of hearing i.e., 17th August, 2026, upon the submission made by the ld. Counsel for the Petitioner, the Court had directed the MCD to identify two alternative sites where the Petitioner would be shifted. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under: “3. After some hearing, Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that his client is willing to shift to the new site allocated by the DDA in the Basant Lok Complex itself, as per the DDA’s layout plan in terms of letter dated 7th September, 2020.

4. Since the Petitioner is an old vendor in the area and is running a Paan Shop, let the MCD/DDA give him at least two options, where he can be shifted.

5. The Assistant Commissioner, MCD and the DDA shall accordingly, in coordination with the Petitioner, identify the two proposed sites on 21st August, 2026 at 11.30 A.M. in the presence of the Petitioner. If any of the said sites are acceptable to the Petitioner, he may shift to the same. If the same is not acceptable, the matter would be decided on the next date.”

4. Ld. Counsels for the DDA and MCD are present and it is submitted that pursuant to the order dated 17th August, 2026, the DDA along with MCD had identified two alternative sites on 21st August, 2026. The said two alternative sites are:

(a) Piazza - B, Site - A at Basant Lok, Community Centre, New Delhi; (b) Piazza - B, Site - B at Basant Lok, Community Centre, New Delhi.

5. Mr. Singhal, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has accepted one of the alternative sites being Site - B at Piazza - B as identified by the authorities and is willing to shift to the said site.

6. Ms. Kalra, ld. Counsel for the MCD has handed across the site plan which records the alternative site identified by the authorities and accepted by the Petitioner. The said site plan is taken on record.

7. In order to avoid any confusion the said site plan is extracted below for ready reference (the relevant area has been marked with the red box):

8. For ease of reference, an enlarged copy of the relevant portion of the site plan, as marked with a red box in the above image, is extracted hereunder:

9. The ld. Counsel for the M/s. PVR INOX Limited has expressed his objections in respect of the said alternative site being allotted to the Petitioner.

10. In the opinion of this Court, since the entire market/shopping complex is a DDA approved market and the alternative site is acceptable to the DDA and MCD, PVR would have no locus to object to the same.

11. Accordingly, the vacant possession of the alternative site being Site-B

in Piazza-B, at Basant Lok, Community Centre, New Delhi shall be handed over by the DDA and MCD to the Petitioner on 19th September, 2026 at 11.30 AM. The Petitioner shall shift within a period of one week.

12. In view of the above directions, no other reliefs are pressed by the Petitioner.

13. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J. SEPTEMBER 17, 2026/jg/msh