Delhi High Court
CONT.CAS(C)/1144/2024 of ANITA SHARMA Vs STATE THROUGH NCT OF DELHI AND ORS on 2 September 2026
$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010430852024 + CONT.CAS(C) 1144/2024 ANITA SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sameer Tayyeb, Mr. Mohd. Salman, Mr. Nazar Hussain, Mr. Ahmad Saeed, Mr. Shahnawaz, Mr. Prateek Pacherwal, Advs. (Through VC) versus STATE THROUGH NCT OF DELHI
$~9
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
#
CNR No. DLHC010430852024
+
CONT.CAS(C) 1144/2024
ANITA SHARMA
.....Petitioner
Through:
Mr.
Sameer
Tayyeb,
Mr.
Mohd.
Salman,
Mr.
Nazar
Hussain,
Mr.
Ahmad Saeed, Mr. Shahnawaz, Mr.
Prateek Pacherwal, Advs. (Through
VC)
versus
STATE THROUGH NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.
.....Respondents
Through:
Mr. Abhinav Singh and Ms. Pearl
Khurana, Advs. for GNCTD
Mob: 9811188892
Mr. Chetanya Singh, Mr. Samarth
Tyagi and Ms. Simra Moin, Advs. for
MCD
Mob: 7503354848
Ms. Parul Agarwal, Adv. for R-2
(Through VC)
Mr. Niraj Kumar, Sr. Central Govt.
Counsel along with Mr. Chaitanya
Kumar, Adv. for R-3/Delhi Police,
along with Mr. Satender Kumar Arya,
S.I., PS Geeta Colony
Mob: 9810020341
Email:
advocateniraj2009@gmail.com
Mr. Lakshay Teotia , Adv. for owner
of
property
Mr.
Udham
Singh
(Through VC)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
% 02.09.2026
1. The present petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 21st February, 2024, passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 2073/2024, whereby, directions had been issued for taking action against the unauthorized construction existing in property bearing no. 29, Sunder Park, Gali No. 2, Shastri Nagar, Geeta Colony, Delhi-110031.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the owner of the property in question submits that his property already stands regularized, and that Regularization Fees has also been duly paid to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”).
3. Learned counsel appearing for the MCD confirms the said fact that the property in question already stands regularized.
4. He draws the attention of this Court to the Status Report dated 26th March, 2026, filed on behalf of the MCD, wherein, it has been stated as follows: “xxx xxx xxx
”
5. Considering the aforesaid fact that the property already stands regularized, no directions can be passed in the present petition.
6. However, in case, the petitioner is aggrieved by any order passed by the MCD for regularization of the property in question, the petitioner is at liberty to seek remedies, in accordance with law.
7. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is accordingly disposed of. MINI PUSHKARNA, J SEPTEMBER 2, 2026/SK