Won't move Satya Niketan case from high court as things are moving: Supreme Court

The bench was hearing a report filed by senior advocate Ajit Kumar Sinha, assisting the court as amicus curiae in a pan-India case on unauthorised construction.

The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed the Delhi High Court to continue monitoring the Satya Niketan building collapse, while directing the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) to submit by September 15 a report on action taken against unauthorised construction and misuse of residential properties at specified locations in the Capital.

The five-storey building housed a “Hostel Daze” PG and had shops on the ground floor where repair and renovation work was underway. (Hindustan Times)

The bench was hearing a report filed by senior advocate Ajit Kumar Sinha, assisting the court as amicus curiae in a pan-India case on unauthorised construction. It clarified that it would not interfere with the Delhi high court’s September 7 order directing the MCD to inspect all PG hostels similar to the one at Satya Niketan and ascertain whether they complied with statutory permissions and building bye-laws.

Deep Dive

What actions has the Supreme Court taken regarding the Satya Niketan building collapse case?

Why were three MCD officials suspended in connection with unauthorised construction?

How did the Satya Niketan building collapse occur, and what led to it?

Powered ByAsk HT

“We do not disturb the position of the case before the high court but the high court of Delhi is requested to monitor the case at shorter intervals,” the court said. The high court is to hear the matter on September 25.

Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Delhi government, said Satya Niketan was a “local” issue and should preferably be monitored by the high court. He assured the bench that MCD and Delhi government were committed to complying with orders passed by either court.

The Supreme Court, which had briefly heard the matter on September 8, had observed that issues before it and the high court were “overlapping” and initially considered transferring the high court proceedings to itself. Sinha, however, told the bench that MCD’s crackdown had been effective following the high court’s order, with several properties where construction beyond the fourth floor being demolished. He also pointed to the Supreme Court’s March 25 directions to states and local authorities in major cities, including Delhi, to act against unauthorised construction.