Demolition order retained against extra rooms and toilet above an owned flat
MCD ordered demolition of construction beyond the sanctioned plan above an owned flat in Delhi. The Delhi High Court refused interim interference with that order, while leaving the owner's statutory appeal to be decided on its merits.
This page records what the cited court, tribunal and government records say happened. Findings belong to the court or authority that made them; this register adds none of its own. Names of private individuals are withheld unless a naming gate clears them.
How we verify →The demolition order remains operative, but the owner's merits appeal before the Appellate Tribunal MCD remained pending when the High Court disposed of the writ petition.
What happened
The High Court reproduced MCD's finding that the applicant owned and occupied the third-floor flat and that construction existed above it beyond the sanctioned building plan.
MCD said the previous permission covered only a barsati room, whereas two rooms and a toilet had been constructed. It ordered the booked construction demolished under Section 343 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act.
The Appellate Tribunal MCD rejected interim relief, while the main statutory appeal remained pending.
The High Court found no infirmity requiring writ interference and dismissed the petition. It directed the tribunal to decide the appeal independently on its merits.
What the record says
“I, Assistant Engineer- Building Department - South Zone, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, vested with the powers of the Commissioner-M.C.D. under Section 343 (1) read with Section 491 of DMC Act, hereby order the applicant to demolish the unauthorised construction, as has been booked by the Department, within fifteen days from the receipt of this order, failing which it will be demolished by the M.C.D. at his / her risk and cost.”
W.P.(C) 8077/2026, paragraph 2.3, pages 2–3 — read the full text
A peaceful economic act
The sanction concerns how an owner used and built above an owned flat. The official order identifies no encroachment on public or another person's land and no injured or complaining victim.
What we could not confirm
The order identifies the premises as Flat No. 935 and an MCD South Zone property but does not print a complete address in the opened text. The construction was reportedly raised by the present owner's predecessor; the order treated the present owner and occupier as responsible.