Delhi High Court
CONT.CAS(C)/1291/2024 of S C GUPTA Vs DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR. on 4 August 2026
$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010520232024 + CONT.CAS(C) 1291/2024 S C GUPTA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Gayatri Virmani, Advocate (through VC) versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Tushar Sannu and Mr. Pravin Bansal, Advs. for
$~38
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
#
CNR No. DLHC010520232024
+
CONT.CAS(C) 1291/2024
S C GUPTA
.....Petitioner
Through:
Ms.
Gayatri
Virmani,
Advocate
(through VC)
versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR.
.....Respondents
Through:
Mr. Tushar Sannu and Mr. Pravin
Bansal, Advs. for DDA.
Email: adv.tusharsannu@gmail.com
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
% 04.08.2026
1. The present petition has been filed alleging wilful disobedience of the directions contained in the judgment dated 01st March, 2024, passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 15655/2004.
2. Vide the judgement dated 01st March, 2024, the following directions had been issued:
42. The respondent DDA is directed to undertake the calculation of misuser charges of 19.34 sq. meters with effect from 15.01.1986 till the date of cancellation within a period of 4 weeks from today and the petitioner shall make the said payment along with restoration charges, if any, within 6 weeks thereafter. xxx xxx xxx”
3. Perusal of the aforesaid judgment shows that the directions to the
Delhi Development Authority (“DDA”) were to undertake calculation of the misuser charges, and inform the same to the petitioner.
4. Upon indication of the said misuser charges, the petitioner was directed to make payment of the said misuser charges along with the restoration charges, if any.
5. Further, upon the payment of the said restoration and misuser charges, the application of the petitioner for conversion of his property from lease hold to free hold is to be decided by the DDA.
6. This Court notes that the DDA has filed an affidavit dated 28th October, 2025, wherein, it had been stated as follows:
7. Since the aforesaid affidavit did not give the details of the calculations of the misuser charges, directions were issued to the DDA to file a fresh affidavit vide the order dated 10th March, 2026.
8. An additional affidavit has been handed over by learned counsel appearing for the respondents to this Court, which is taken on record.
9. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner confirms the fact that a copy of the said additional affidavit has been received by her today morning.
10. The additional affidavit filed on behalf of the DDA, states as under:
11. Accordingly, this Court notes that the directions as passed in the judgment dated 01st March, 2024, stand complied with.
12. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the misuser charges, as calculated by the DDA, are not correct and proper.
13. If that be the case, the petitioner is at liberty to seek remedies in accordance with law.
14. No further orders are required to be passed by this Court.
15. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of, with the aforesaid liberty. MINI PUSHKARNA, J AUGUST 4, 2026/ak