$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010469592026 + LPA 796/2026 & CM No.67597/2026 JAI PRAKASH .....Appellant Through: Mr. Deepak Sharma, Adv. Versus MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI (MCD) & ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Kannopriya Gupta, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Ajay Aroraa, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Vansh Luthra, Adv. for Owner/Occupier Ms. Urvi Mohan and Mr. Ankit Bhargava, Advs. for R-3 to 5 for GNCTD Mr. Kameshwar Nath Mishra, SPC with Mr. Chetan Jadon, GP, Mr. Rahul Pal, Mr. S. Prasad, Advs. for R-6 Mr. Sacchin Puri, Sr. Adv. with Mr. V. P. Rana, Mr. Abhishek Singh, Mr. Swastik Bhuchar, Advs. for R-7 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA O R D E R % 29.09.2026 1. Heard learned counsel representing the parties. 2. By means of this intra-court appeal, the appellant seeks to take 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 01/10/2026 at 11:41:00 exception to an order dated 27.07.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the W.P.(C) 4439/2025 instituted by the appellant has been dismissed. 3. The regular authorities are not even made party yet the writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the authorities to conduct the demarcation in respect of the land comprising in Khasra No.203/1, 203/2 and 207 situated in Village Aya Nagar, Tehsil Mehrauli, Delhi 110017. 4. Further prayer sought in the writ petition was a direction to be issued to the authorities to demolish the alleged illegal and unauthorized construction on the aforesaid Khasra numbers and also to initiate proceedings against the alleged land grabbers in respect of the property comprising Khasra No.203/1. 5. Learned Single Judge has relied upon various status reports filed by the Municipal Council of Delhi (‘MCD’), wherein it was stated that the writ petition was filed with vague and indefinite assertions and further that the petitioner did not provide any specific details of the properties against which allegation of unauthorized construction have been leveled. 6. Learned Single Judge further observed that the appellant, by filing the writ petition, had only provided Khasra numbers without the details of the properties and therefore, the appellant himself was not clear about the properties. Learned Single Judge has further observed that the appellant had not impleaded the owners of various properties listed in the writ petition in respect of which allegations were raised that they have been constructed unauthorized. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant had submitted that the case set up by the appellant before the learned Single Judge was that the buildings, 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 01/10/2026 at 11:41:00 which are said to be situated in the aforesaid Khasra numbers, are unauthorized. Learned counsel for the appellant has stated that in fact, the land comprising Khasra Nos.203/1 belongs to Gaon Sabha, whereas 203/2 is a private land and 207 is listed in the Forest Department. 8. The aforesaid issue raised by the appellant in the proceedings of the writ petition, in our opinion, are clearly based on absolutely vague and indefinite details of the properties. It becomes difficult, rather impossible, for the MCD to identify the property and to take appropriate action in respect of which allegation is made about the unauthorized construction in absence of the specific details of the properties. Further, if the prayer made by the appellant was to be allowed, the owners or occupiers of the building would have been the most affected parties, which admittedly were not impleaded by the appellant in the writ petition, in absence of impleadment of necessary party, the writ petition was filed which according to us suffered from the vice of non-joinder of necessary parties. 9. Various other submissions have also been made by the learned counsel for the appellant, however, the same is not reflected by the impugned order. 10. In this respect, the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that on 27.07.2026, when the impugned order was passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellant was not represented. 11. If that be so, the ground of impeaching the order dated 27.07.2026, that certain other aspects have not been considered by the learned Single Judge, is not tenable. 12. For all the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any good ground to entertain the appeal, which is hereby dismissed along with pending 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 01/10/2026 at 11:41:00 application. DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ TEJAS KARIA, J SEPTEMBER 29, 2026/j 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 01/10/2026 at 11:41:00