SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- B.N. Kirpal and N. Santosh Hegde, JJ.

I.A. Nos. 17, 18, 19, 20 & 21 in W.P. (C) No. 537/1992 with W.P. (C) No. 725/1994 (News Item "Hindustan Times" A.Q.F.M. Yamuna vs Central Pollution Control Board & Anr.) with I.A. Nos. 20 & 21 in W.P. (C) No. 4677/1985 (M.C. Mehta vs Union of India) with I.A. No. 1207, 1183, 1216, 1251. D/d. 31.7.2001.

Comdr. Sureshwar D Sinha & ors. - Petitioners

Versus

U.O.I. & ors. - Respondents

Illegal encroachment - Chief Secretary as well as Commissioner, M.C.D. to file within four weeks specific affidavit dealing with each of clauses of letter dated 28th August, 2000 and also indicate as to what is total encroached area in Delhi as well as number of unauthorised/illegal constructions which is raised - M.C.D. also to inform this Court in affidavit to be filed as to why no requisite action taken for stopping gross misuse of buildings in residential areas for commercial purposes and in construction of commercial buildings in residential areas where only residential houses are permitted.

[Paras 3 and 4]

ORDER

W.P. (C) No. 725/1994

1. We have seen two affidavits, one of the Chief Secretary as well as the affidavit on behalf of the M.C.D. We are sorry to note that the affidavits do not specifically deal with the points in issue. Vide our order dated 9th May, 2001 these authorities along with Vice- Chairman, D.D.A., Chairperson, N.D.M.C. and the Development Commissioner were required to file affidavit to indicate as to what measures they have taken in the implementation of the letter dated 28th August, 2000. At least ten measures were required to be taken in terms of the said letter dated 28th August, 2000. The affidavits in reply do not deal with them specifically and general averments have been made which are not satisfactory.

2. The perusal of the affidavits further shows that the parties concerned have not even touched the tip of the iceberg as far as demolition of unauthorised constructions is concerned. The number of unauthorised constructions which are said to have been demolished are a small fraction of what is required to be done. It is quite evident that there is now no fear of the law catching up atleast with those persons who do not believe in adhering to following the rules and regulations laid down with respect to construction of property. Unauthorised encroachment and illegal construction even as per the affidavits are increasing. It is a dangerous trend if the people do not have either respect for or fear of law primarily due to non-enforcement of the law. It is something which causes us some concern and it would be appropriate if serious thought is given to this aspect at the highest quarters.

3. We direct the Chief Secretary as well as the Commissioner, M.C.D. to file within four weeks specific affidavit dealing with each of the clauses of the letter dated 28th August, 2000. They will also indicate as to what is the total encroached area in Delhi as well as the number of unauthorised/illegal constructions which have been raised.

4. The affidavit of the Chief Secretary seems to give some indication of action taken for removing encroachment from some of these areas in Delhi. We would require the Union of India/Ministry of Urban Development to check and inform the Court whether what is stated in the annexures to the affidavit of the Chief Secretary from pages 43 to 63 is correct. The Central Government will be at liberty to ask for information from the local authority in order to enable it to comply with the orders passed today.

5. The M.C.D. will also inform this Court in the affidavit to be filed as to why no requisite action has been taken for stopping the gross misuse of the buildings in the residential areas for commercial purposes and in the construction of commercial buildings in residential areas where only residential houses are permitted. To come up after four weeks.

I.A. Nos. 20 & 21 in W.P. (C) 4677/1985

6. It is stated that 11 Sewage Treatment Plants have started functioning in Delhi. Representatives of the C.P.C.B. as well as the Central Government should give a status report with regard to the said work.

7. To come up after four weeks.

W.P. (C) 537/1992

8. Adjourned. List after four weeks.

.