$~76
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW DELHI
% 					         Date of Decision: 06th October, 2025
+ 	W.P.(C) 15229/2025
	RAVI SINGHANIA	  		                        .....Petitioner
Through:	Ms. Parul Agarwal, Adv. (Through VC)
						Mob: 9873416566
						Email: advparulgoel@gmail.com

				versus

	MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI		.....Respondent
Through:	Mr. Sagar Kumar, SC for R-1/MCD 
						Mob: 7054160914
						Email: 
     mrsagarkumar@hotmail.com

	CORAM:
	HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
     MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (Oral)
1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondent-Municipal Corporation of Delhi (“MCD”), not to execute the Sealing Order dated 17th September, 2025, in respect of the property bearing no. WZ-415, Nangal Raya, New Delhi-110046.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the present writ petition has been filed on account of the fact that there is no Presiding Officer in the Appellate Tribunal MCD (“ATMCD”) as of now. She submits that against the aforesaid Sealing Order dated 17th September, 2025, an appeal has been filed before the ATMCD, which was listed on 25th September, 2025, and the next date has been given as 29th October, 2025.
3. She further submits that earlier a Demolition Order dated 05th March, 2025, had been issued by the respondent. She submits that an appeal challenging the said Demolition Order has also been filed, which is pending before the ATMCD.
4. She further draws the attention of this Court to the order dated 25th March, 2025, passed by the ATMCD, in Appeal No. 162/2025, to submit that status quo order in favour of the petitioner with regard to the Demolition Order, has already been passed by the ATMCD. The relevant portions of the order dated 25th March, 2025, passed by ATMCD, read as under:
“xxx xxx xxx

3.	In view of the aforesaid submissions made by Ld. Counsel for appellant, status quo be maintained in respect of the property in question till the next date of hearing.

xxx xxx xxx”
	 (Emphasis Supplied)
5. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for the respondent-MCD, who confirms the fact that there is no Presiding Officer in the ATMCD, as on today.
6. This Court notes the submission made before this Court that there is no Presiding Officer in the ATMCD, currently.
7. Further, this Court also takes note of the fact that there is already a status quo order in favour of the petitioner, as passed by the ATMCD in the appeal filed by the petitioner against the Demolition Order issued by the MCD.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is directed that no coercive action shall be taken by the MCD, pursuant to the Sealing Order dated 17th September, 2025, till the next date of hearing before the ATMCD, i.e., 29th October, 2025.
9. It is further directed that, in case, on the next date of hearing, there is no Presiding Officer in the ATMCD, then the protection granted by this Court shall continue to any other next date, which is given by the ATMCD.  
10. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, which shall be decided by the ATMCD independently, after hearing the parties.
11. Rights and contentions of all the parties are left open, and are to be decided in appropriate proceedings. 
12. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition is disposed of.


MINI PUSHKARNA, J
OCTOBER 6, 2025/SK



					
                                                                 

           Page 2 of 3