Delhi HC rebukes CBI over lack of action against errant officials in Signature View Apts case

The agency faced the ire of justice Girish Kathpalia on Monday, after the flat owners’ lawyer apprised the court of LG VK Saxena’s direction to initiate criminal action against errant officials of the DDA and other agencies in 2023

New Delhi

The matter would be next heard on September 18. (HT Archive)

The Delhi High Court rebuked the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) for its laxity in initiating criminal action against Delhi Development Authority (DDA) officials and other individuals involved in the poor quality construction of Signature View Apartments in Delhi’s Mukherjee Nagar, and criticised it for citing the lack of requisite sanction as a reason for the delay.

The agency faced the ire of justice Girish Kathpalia on Monday, after the flat owners’ lawyer, Ajay Aggarwal, apprised the court of lieutenant governor (LG) VK Saxena’s direction to initiate criminal action against errant officials of the DDA and other agencies in 2023, and a vigilance inquiry to identify officers responsible for the lapse.

Despite this, CBI counsel Anupam Sharma said that for the past two years, the agency had been requesting the DDA to provide the vigilance inquiry report and other relevant documents required to obtain sanction for initiating an inquiry against the officials. He further contended that action against private contractors could not proceed without such sanction, as the investigation was contingent on the involvement of public servants. Sharma further stated that the agency would promptly initiate action if the court directed the registration of an FIR, without obtaining sanction.

Considering the contention, the court said, “It is certainly surprising that the premiere investigating agency of the country is not able to get the requisite documentary record for more than two years, that too, from another government agency. Not just this, it appears that CBI is not seriously interested in this case because no officer/official from CBI is present in Court to assist the learned SPP.”

It added, “To add to it, there is no explanation at all as to why till date, no case has been registered by the CBI against the private contractors and testing agencies, for which approval under Section 17A is not required. Be that as it may, the present proceedings have to be taken to a logical conclusion. Since CBI does not want to act on its own and has been simply waiting for documents from DDA for the past more than two years, this Court has to decide the matter on merits after hearing all concerned.”

The matter would be next heard on September 18.

The court made the observations on a petition filed by Signature View Apartments homebuyers, seeking the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) or CBI probe into the conduct of erring DDA officials and contractors involved in the construction.

Signature View Apartments, comprising 336 flats, was constructed by DDA between 2007 and 2010. Concerns regarding its structural stability arose within a few years, and a 2023 IIT Delhi report confirmed that the buildings were unsafe. On December 23, 2024, justice Mini Pushkarna allowed the demolition and reconstruction of the buildings, declaring them unsafe for habitation. The court also directed residents to vacate the premises within three months and ordered the DDA to pay rent to all flat owners until new flats were handed over.

On December 5, 2024, the high court directed the CBI to send a notice to DDA’s competent authority to initiate an inquiry, and asked the DDA to cooperate and supply the material at the earliest.

To be sure, another bench of the Delhi High Court, in a separate petition, had restrained the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) from taking coercive action against nine flat owners of the Signature View Apartments in Mukherjee Nagar until August 25. The court, on August 7, acknowledged that while the residents were legally bound to vacate the flats as per the earlier ruling, DDA also has a corresponding obligation to comply with its direction regarding rental payments.