$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010452232026 + W.P.(C)13928/2026, CM.APPL.65085/2026 ARTI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Ms. Neha Kushwaha, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Thalour, Mr. Naman Sherstra, Mr. Akshay Lodhi and Mr. Vishal Tiwari, Advs. versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Counsel (Appearance not given) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE O R D E R % 21.09.2026 The present petition has been received on urgent mentioning. As such, the same is taken up for hearing. CM.APPL.65086/2026 (for exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application is disposed of. W.P.(C)13928/2026, CM.APPL.65085/2026 3. By virtue of the present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks following reliefs:- “a) Issue writ of mandamus writ, order or direction directing Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to forthwith furnish to the Petitioner a copy of the demolition order issued under Section 343(1), and any operative sealing order under Section 345A, together with the relevant inspection/action 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 23/09/2026 at 11:15:10 report relied upon for the Impugned Vacation Notice dated 17.09.2026; and/or b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction restraining Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 from taking demolition/sealing/coercive action pursuant to Impugned Vacation Notice No. D/AE(B)/KBZ/2026/2477 dated 17.09.2026 for a reasonable limited period so as to enable the Petitioner to avail the statutory remedy before the Appellate Tribunal, MCD; and/or c) Issue a writ of certiorari thereby quashing and set aside Impugned Vacation Notice No. D/AE(B)/KBZ/2026/2477 dated 17.09.2026 issued by Respondents; and/or d) Issue a writ of mandamus thereby directing the Respondents to maintain status quo with regards to the Impugned Vacation Notice No.D/AE(B)/KBZ/2026/2477 dated 17.09.2026 till the time a demolition notice and sealing notice is served upon the Petitioner; and/or e) Pass such other or further order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 4. Issue notice. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent accepts notice. He, at the outset, submits that the Demolition Order dated 28.08.2024 passed by the respondent has been duly served upon the petitioner. In fact, he also submits that on 06.11.2024, part demolition in the subject premises involved herein has already been carried out, inasmuch as two panels on the3rd floor and on the 4th floor have both been demolished. Moreover, he further submits that, it is the petitioner who has not taken any steps in accordance with law till date and thus the present petition challenging the vacation notice dated 17.09.2026 is liable to be dismissed. 6. In response, learned counsel for petitioner upon instructions submits that the Demolition Order has never been received by the petitioner, 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 23/09/2026 at 11:15:10 however, he affirms that part demolition in the property concerned has already been carried out. 7. The aforesaid, per se, raises a doubt in the mind of this Court since it is quite strange that the petitioner never challenged the part demolition carried out by the respondent for the last, almost, two years ago and that too after it was without issuance of the earlier Demolition Order, and it is only now that she seeks to challenge the Vacation Notice dated 17.09.2026. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner seeks to withdraw the present petition with liberty to seek appropriate remedies in accordance with law i.e. including filing of an Appeal under Section 343(2) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (DMC Act) within a period of one week. 9. Learned counsel for the respondents, under such circumstances, fairly submits that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner only till the initiation of such action by the petitioner within a period of one week. 10. As such, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is clarified that no coercive action would be taken by the respondent/ MCD against the petitioner for a period of one week from today. 11. Needless to say, the said Appeal under Section 343(2) of the DMC Act as also an application for stay therein, if as and when moved, shall be decided on its own merits and in accordance with law as also without being influenced by the observations made by this Court in the present order. 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 23/09/2026 at 11:15:10 12. Before parting, since learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a copy of the Demolition Order dated 28.08.2024, which, according to learned counsel for the respondents has though been duly served upon the petitioner, however, without adverting to either the merits or to the rights and contentions of the respondents, he undertakes to supply the same to learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of the day. SAURABH BANERJEE, J SEPTEMBER 21, 2026/rr 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 23/09/2026 at 11:15:10