W.P.(C) 11511/2026 p. 1 $~47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010370582026 + W.P.(C) 11511/2026 & CM APPL. 53312/2026 ARUN KUMAR GUPTA & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Aditi Aggarwal, Advocate. versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Tushar Parashar, Advocate for MCD. Ms. Deepika, Advocate for R-3 (through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL O R D E R % 12.08.2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to take appropriate action, including sealing, removal or demolition of the telecommunication tower installed by respondent no.3 in the vicinity of the property of the petitioners. 2. It is stated that the tower has been installed by respondent no.3 at Shop No. 6, Shopping Complex, Kakaji Lane, Satyawati Nagar, Ashok Vihar Phase-III, Delhi in an unauthorized manner, without any permission from the MCD. It is further stated that there is risk of the tower collapsing and causing damage to the petitioners’ property . 3. The petitioners nowhere state as to how far the property of the petitioners is located from the premises where the tower is being installed. 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 17/08/2026 at 11:55:38 W.P.(C) 11511/2026 p. 2 4. Counsel for the petitioners submits that various complaints have been made by the RWA against the tower, however no action has been taken by respondent no.1/MCD. 5. Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.1/MCD, on advance notice submits that the property of the petitioners is at some distance away from the premises where the tower is installed. Therefore, they have no locus to file the present writ petition. 6. He further submits that under the Telecommunications (Right of Way) Rules, 2024 (‘RoW Rules’), no permission is required from the MCD for installation of a tower on a private property. 7. Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.3 on advance notice submits that the requisite documents including a structural stability report has been filed in terms of the RoW Rules. 8. This Court in the judgements in Harjit Singh v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors., 2026 SCC OnLine Del 697 and Sunil Tyagi & Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors., 2026 SCC OnLine Del 2483 has held that in terms of the RoW Rules, prior permission is not required from the MCD for installation of the tower on a private property. The Court held that under Rule 15 of the RoW Rules, only structural stability certificate and an intimation has to be furnished to the statutory authority prior to commencement of the installation. 9. In the present case, the respondent no.3, i.e., the owner of the property, has clearly stated that he has already filed the requisite documents including a structural stability report in terms of the RoW Rules. 10. Considering the aforesaid submissions, I do not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same is dismissed. 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 17/08/2026 at 11:55:38 W.P.(C) 11511/2026 p. 3 11. Pending application stands disposed of accordingly. AMIT BANSAL, J AUGUST 12, 2026 Vivek/- 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 17/08/2026 at 11:55:38