W.P.(C) 9585/2026 $~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 9585/2026 & CM APPL. 44661/2026 NEELAM BHATIA .....Petitioner Through: versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shashwat Kumar and Mr. Jhunaina Nirvana, Advocates for Mr. Abhishek Kumar Thakur, Advocate for MCD R-1/MCD Mr. Sachin Dev Sharma, Mr. Ravi Bhushan, Mr. Vishnu Dutt Sharma and Mr. Kapil Pandey, Advocates for R-2 and R-3 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL O R D E R % 24.07.2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent no.1/MCD to intervene and stop the ongoing construction being carried out by the private respondents no.2 and 3 at the front portion of property bearing no.4346-4347-4348, Main Road, Pahari Dhiraj, Sadar Bazar, Delhi-110006 (hereinafter ‘subject property’), which is adjacent to the property of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner had earlier filed a civil suit on the basis that the private respondents no.2 and 3 are carrying out construction without any sanctioned This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/07/2026 at 15:33:39 W.P.(C) 9585/2026 plan. However, subsequently, the plan was sanctioned by the respondent no.1/MCD and therefore, the suit was dismissed as infructuous. 3. The aforesaid sanctioned plan was challenged by the petitioner before the Appellate Tribunal, MCD (ATMCD) and the appeal is pending before the ATMCD. 4. The petitioner has filed photographs to show the construction which is causing damage to the petitioner’s property (Annexure A-9 to the writ petition). 5. Notice was issued on 17th July, 2026 and counsel for respondent no.1/MCD was directed to take instructions. 6. On instructions, counsel for respondent no.1/MCD submits that construction being carried out by private respondents no.2 and 3 is in terms of sanctioned plan and no deviation has been found. 7. Counsel for private respondents no.2 and 3 submits that the contention of damage to the petitioner’s property was raised by petitioner in the civil suit filed by the petitioner which has already been disposed of. 8. Considering the aforesaid submissions, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. The same is dismissed. 9. The pending application stands disposed of. AMIT BANSAL, J JULY 24, 2026 ds This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/07/2026 at 15:33:39