MCD seeks to demolish panel authority

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) seem to be on a collision course over the powers vested by the court in its three-member monitoring committee and nine court commissioners ��� with the intention of checking unauthorised construction ��� by dubbing them as an unconstitutional "parallel administration".
Challenging the high court's direction to Delhi government's chief secretary and MCD commissioner, among others, to report to the committee, the MCD moved a petition on Wednesday and said the direction was contrary to law and the Constitution.A bench comprising Chief Justice M K Sharma and Justice Rekha Sharma took note of the plea and fixed the matter for February 14.
"The monitoring committee has no statutory backing or authority and its creation amounts to putting in place a parallel administration," said Harish Salve, while praying for modification of the directions given by the court on March 23 and May 18 last year while vesting powers in the committee and court commissioners. The monitoring committee comprises R S Gupta, B L Vohra and R K Mishra.
The MCD's petition filed on Wednesday pertained to that part of HC's earlier order which constituted the monitoring committee "to carry out, implement and execute" the directions passed by court in the writ petition filed by Kalyan Sansthan Social Welfare Organisation.
"Execution of HC's directions be done by those who by law are authorised to implement the directions of the court and to whom the writ of mandamus is directed,"said Salve. The MCD petition said the HC's earlier orders further stated that "the commissioner of MCD, chief secretary NCT of Delhi, vice chairman of Delhi Development Authority (DDA), divisional commissioner of Delhi, chief conservator of forests and the Ridge Management Board are directed to report to this committee".
Salve pleaded this was contrary to law and the Constitution. "The statute ensures their (government officials') independence... asking officials to report to a committee set up by a court, which has no statutory backing or authority, is contrary to law," he said. Salve pleaded that execution of HC's directions be done by those (only government officials) who by law are authorised to implement the directions of the court and to whom the writ of mandamus is directed.
"On many an occasion, disputed questions arise as to the legality of a construction or the legality of any activity. This can be decided by either those who are statutorily empowered to take such decision or by the HC," he pleaded.
"The judicial power to decide disputed questions cannot, as a matter of law, be delegated to the court commissioner," said the MCD petition, questioning the monitoring committee's power to impose penalties.
It may be recalled that it was during the hearings on this PIL that HC ordered large-scale demolition of unauthorised constructions, including those belonging to the "big fish". The PIL hearings also witnessed suspension of 17 executive engineers and departmental action against over 90 assistant engineers and junior engineers of the building department of MCD and sever criticism of the vigilance wing of the MCD and the "political bosses" of the allegedly tainted officials.
The public outcry over the demolitions eventually forced the Union government to enact a new law to regularise illegal constructions on payment of a penalty.