Supreme Court rejects de-sealing plea for New Rajinder Nagar shop; upper floors will require conversion charges and penalties

A Bench of Chief Justice B. R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran heard an application for de-sealing of premises at Shop/Plot No.106, New Rajinder Nagar Market (LSC), New Delhi. The plea sought relief under the common order dated 18.12.2023 of a Judicial Committee constituted in Writ Petition (C) No.4677 of 1985; the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) had challenged that Committee’s order in a separate proceeding.

The Court held that the applicant’s I.A. for de-sealing must be rejected on the merits. The Bench found that the lease and subsequent freehold documents and sanctioned plans showed the ground floor as a commercial shop while the upper floors were sanctioned and approved as residential. The Court emphasised that designated shop‑cum‑residence local shopping centres under MPD‑2021 permitted conversion of upper floors only upon payment of conversion charges and regularisation of excess FAR; “the upper floors though eligible for conversion, it can happen only with payment of the conversion charges.” The Judicial Committee’s en bloc approach was held insufficient to supplant factual, case‑by‑case adjudication and statutory remedies available under municipal law. The Court directed MCD to issue a joint inspection notice, identify non‑compoundable deviations, quantify conversion charges and penalty for excess FAR, and allowed the applicant the opportunity to remove non‑compoundable constructions and deposit charges to regularise the premises.

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: Background The dispute arose from long‑running litigation in W.P.(C) No.4677/1985 (M.C. Mehta) addressing misuse of residential premises and unauthorized commercial activity across Delhi. A Monitoring Committee and later a Judicial Committee had been appointed by this Court to oversee sealing, de‑sealing, regularisation, demolition and removal of encroachments. The Judicial Committee’s common order of 18.12.2023 addressed markets generally; this I.A. sought individual relief to de‑seal Shop No.106 on the basis that the market was intended for commercial use and predecessors had treated upper floors as commercial. The MCD countered that only the ground floor was authorised as commercial and that upper floors were sanctioned as residential; it relied upon lease/deed documents, sanctioned plans, and MPD classifications. Earlier orders of the Court (notably 14.08.2020 and 13.09.2022) had clarified the Monitoring Committee’s powers and directed case‑by‑case consideration by the Judicial Committee; the Court recorded that “the Committee has not looked into individual cases of buildings/units.” The present Bench examined lease deeds, conveyance documents, sanction plans (including a 2005 sanction for residential upper floors), FAR calculations under successive MPDs, and MCD inspection reports. Finding no persuasive evidence that the first floor had been lawfully used as commercial prior to conveyance, the Court concluded the plot lay in a shop‑cum‑residence LSC under MPD‑2021 where conversion required payment of conversion charges. The I.A. was dismissed; the Court directed MCD to issue a joint inspection notice specifying non‑compoundable violations, conversion charges for upper floors, and penalty for excess FAR, and permitted the applicant to regularise by removing non‑compoundable work and depositing the dues.

Case Details: Case No.: 2025 INSC 1274; I.A. Nos.203615 & 218080 of 2024 and I.A. No.210981 of 2025 in W.P.(C) No.4677 of 1985 Case Title: M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Ors. Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Kailash Vasdev, Senior Counsel For the Respondent(s): Mr. Sanjib Sen, Senior Counsel (for MCD) Amicus Curiae: Mr. S. Guru Krishna Kumar, Senior Counsel

New Delhi; October 31, 2025.