M/S Shiv Dayal Singh Oil Company vs Delhi Development Authority

Court: Delhi High Court
Case type: Writ Petition Civil
Decided on: 24-03-2026

<div> $~100 & 101 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision:24.03.2026 + W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & CM APPL. 3265/2023 M/S SHIV DAYAL SINGH OIL COMPANY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jaspreet Singh Kapur & Ms. Shweta, Advs. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .....Respondent Through: Mr. Kritika Gupta, Mr. Sanjay Katyal & Ms. Vidushi Singhania, Advs. Mr. Sanjay Katyal, SC with Ms. Kritika Gupta & Mr. Nitish Kumar Danda, Advs. 101 + W.P.(C) 3902/2023 M/S SHIV DAYAL SINGH OIL COMPANY .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jaspreet Singh Kapur & Ms. Shweta, Advs. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .....Respondent Through: Mr. Kritika Gupta, Mr. Sanjay Katyal & Ms. Vidushi Singhania, Advs. Ms. Shobhana Takiar Standing Counsel for DDA with Mr. Shivam Takiar, Mr. Prateek Dhir, Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 1 of 24 : JASMEET SINGH, J ( ORAL ) 1. These are petitions filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. The W.P.(C) 1914/2019 seeks the following prayer: - “a. issue a Writ in the nature of CERTIORARI and/or any other appropriate Writ/ Order/ Direction of like nature for quashing the show-cause notice dated 14.11.2018 and the order dated 07.02.2019 passed by the Respondent and further restraining the Respondent from taking any coercive action against SKO/LDO Depot site no. 2, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, allotted to the Petitioner.” 3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is aggrieved by the show cause notice dated 14.11.2018 and order dated 06.02.2019/07.02.2019, whereby the plot of land of the petitioner bearing SKO/LDO Depot site no. 2, Vasant Vihar, Near DTC Bus Depot, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi has been directed to be taken over by the respondent by cancelling the allotment. The petitioner has been asked to hand over the vacant possession of the said land by 13.02.2019. 4. Hence, the present petition was filed. 5. During the pendency of the proceedings, this Court passed the order dated 07.10.2022 in W.P. (C) 1914/2019, which reads as under:- “1. After some hearing, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner’s application (CM APPL.1009/2021) as a representation, and to Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 2 of 24 pass a reasoned and speaking order thereon within a period of eight weeks from today. The said application has been filed by the petitioner seeking allotment of an alternative land to the petitioner of the same size/area as has been allotted to the petitioner for the purpose of carrying out his business as specified in the No Objection Certificate (NOC) dated 21.09.2016 as well as Letter of Intent dated 18.09.2017. 2. The respondent is directed to grant an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and take into account all contentions of the petitioner, without being influenced by any order that may have been passed previously, before passing a reasoned and speaking order. 3. Needless to say, in the event of the petitioner being aggrieved with the outcome of the aforesaid exercise, it shall be at liberty to revive the present petition.” 4. Till disposal of the representation as aforesaid, no coercive steps shall be taken by the respondent.” 6. Pursuant to the direction in the order dated 07.10.2022, the respondent passed a detailed speaking order on 19.01.2023, rejecting the entitlement of the petitioner to another plot and hence W.P.(C) 3902/2023 was filed seeking the following prayers:- “a. issue a Writ in the nature of CERTIORARI and/or any other appropriate Writ/ Order/ Direction of like nature for quashing the impugned order dated 19.01.2023 passed by the Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 3 of 24 Respondent; b. Issue a Writ in the nature of MANDAMUS and/or any other appropriate Writ/ Order/ Direction directing the Respondent to allot alternate land of the same size/ area as Depot Site No. 2, Vasant Vihar, Near DTC Bus Depot, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi; c. Any other order(s) which this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in the favour of the Petitioner and against the Respondent.” 7. In W.P.(C) 3902/2023, the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was allotted a plot no. 2, Vasant Vihar, near DTC Bus Depot, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi for the purpose of storing of ancillary petroleum products. 8. Since the sale of kerosene is banned in the city of Delhi, the petitioner requested Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas on 22.12.2015 for setting up a CNG facility at the said land. 9. On 22.08.2016, the Indraprastha Gas Limited issued a letter to the petitioner, which reads as under:- Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 4 of 24 Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 5 of 24 10. The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas issued a letter of 12.09.2016 to Indraprastha Gas Limited, which reads as under:- Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 6 of 24 11. The respondent DDA acting on the said letters, issued a No-Objection Certificate to the petitioner, which reads as under:- Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 7 of 24 Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 8 of 24 12. Thereafter, Indraprastha Gas Limited on 18.09.2018 issued a Letter of Intent for setting up CNG station under DODO model, which reads as under:- Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 9 of 24 Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 10 of 24 Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 11 of 24 13. The No Objection Certificate for CNG dispensing station at Vasant Vihar was also issued by the Additional Commissioner of police in favour of the petitioner in November, 2017. 14. The respondent issued a show cause notice dated 14.11.2018, to the petitioner alleging violation of clause No. 5 of the No Objection Certificate dated 21.09.2016 which reads as under:- Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 12 of 24 Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 13 of 24 15. The petitioner duly replied to the said show cause notice on 24.01.2019, which reads as under:- “The Deputy Director Date: 24.01.2019 Commercial Land DDA, New Delhi Sub.: Show cause notice dated 14.11.2018 vide file No. F 13(78)85/CRC DDA at Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 Sir, With reference to the above show cause notice, we wish to inform you that we are thankful for the conversion ofSK/LDO site into direct allotment for storage of LPG/CNG and other Petroleum product use and you have grant us no objection certificate vide your letter No. F.13(78)85/CRC/DDA/1744 dated 21.09.2016. In this regard we submit the following contents for above site as under: 1. Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas has recommended us the dealership for CNG on existing land under rehabilitation for Freedom Fighter Category/War Disabled. 2. M/s. Indraprastha Gas Ltd. has allotted us the dealership for CNG Station as per recommendation of Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas. Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 14 of 24 3. Additional Commissioner of Police, Delhi has already granted us NOC for CNG Station on the existing land for we have deposited the excess amount of more than 10 lacs upto 31.03.2019 on the above land. 4. Further we like to inform you that we have removed the unauthorized construction at the site and has been already demolish. 5. Now existing construction is according to explosive department vide their approved plan. Therefore, you are requested to withdraw the said notice or allot us alternate site on main road at the nearby the place for CNG Station as per recommendation of Ministry of Petroleum of Natural Gas. Yours faithfully, (Sd/-) M/s. SHIVDAYAL OIL COMPANY Proprietor (KANWAR JAIN)” 16. It is the case of the respondent that the reply of the petitioner was never served upon the respondent. Be that as it may, a detailed speaking order was passed on 06.02.2019, which reads as under:- Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 15 of 24 Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 16 of 24 17. I have heard learned counsels for the parties. 18. A perusal of the show cause notice shows that the respondents had alleged that the petitioner had carried out illegal construction in the basement, ground floor and first floor and encroached on DDA’s property. Hence, the show cause notice under clause No. 5 of the No Objection Certificate was issued. The petitioner duly replied to the same and complied with the show cause notice and removed the illegal and unauthorised construction. The case of the petitioner is that even today there is no encroachment on the basement, ground floor and first floor. 19. The perusal of the impugned order shows that the allegation made in the show cause notice has been accepted and consequently the impugned order has been passed. 20. Mr. Kapur, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the copy of the reply given by the petitioner is duly accompanied by a receipt no. REC/LD/193245 dated 24.01.2019 clearly showing receipt of the reply of the petitioner. In this regard, it is relevant to reproduce the paragraph No. 4 (IV) of the counter affidavit of the respondent filed on 23.09.2019. The same reads as under:- “4… IV That the reply filed by the Petitioner on 24.01.2019 was not found satisfactory and unauthorized construction was made on this Site without sanctioned of building plan at the site, in view of the above the Answering Respondent had no option but to cancel the license and restore the land from Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 17 of 24 the licensee. Cancellation letter was sent to the chief divisional retail sales manager lOCL, and to M/S Shiv Dayal Singh with respect to allotment of SKO/LDO Depot site no. 2, Vasant Vihar near DTC bus Depot, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi, vide letter dated 06.02.2019. The copy of the letter dated 06.02.2019 is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE - D.” 21. On the one hand, in the counter affidavit, the respondent states that the reply dated 24.01.2019 was not found satisfactory, while on the other hand in the impugned order in paragraph No. 3, the respondent has categorically stated that no reply has been filed. 22. In view of paragraph No. 4 reproduced above coupled with the receipt bearing No. REC/LD/193245 number clearly leads me to believe that the reply was duly received by the respondent, yet was not considered by the respondent in the speaking order. 23. The order is therefore liable to be set aside on violation of principles of natural justice alone. However, since the petition has been pending for more than six years, I am also inclined to decide the impugned order on merits as well. 24. The admitted case of the petitioner is that there is no illegal and unauthorised construction or encroachment on public land. The respondent in the show cause notice as well as in the impugned order has not stated the details of any encroachment except a simple bald averment. The purpose of show cause notice is to inform the party of the allegations of violation Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 18 of 24 against the party concerned so that the due response to the said allegations may be given. 25. The show cause notice is cryptic and does not deal in detail as to what the nature or extent or the details of encroachment. The action of the respondents vitiates the foundational principles of natural justice. A show cause notice is not a mere empty formality. It constitutes the very basis of the proceedings and delineates the scope within which the inquiry has to be conducted and action has to be taken. A person must be put to notice about the specific allegations against him so as to grant him adequate opportunity to respond to such allegations. The same was also held in Gorkha Security Services v. Govt. (NCT of Delhi), (2014) 9 SCC 105. “Contents of the show-cause notice 21. The central issue, however, pertains to the requirement of stating the action which is proposed to be taken. The fundamental purpose behind the serving of show- cause notice is to make the noticee understand the precise case set up against him which he has to meet. This would require the statement of imputations detailing out the alleged breaches and defaults he has committed, so that he gets an opportunity to rebut the same. Another requirement, according to us, is the nature of action which is proposed to be taken for such a breach. That should also be stated so that the noticee is able to point out that proposed action is not warranted in the given case, even if the Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 19 of 24 defaults/breaches complained of are not satisfactorily explained. When it comes to blacklisting, this requirement becomes all the more imperative, having regard to the fact that it is harshest possible action. 22. The High Court has simply stated that the purpose of show-cause notice is primarily to enable the noticee to meet the grounds on which the action is proposed against him. No doubt, the High Court is justified to this extent. However, it is equally important to mention as to what would be the consequence if the notice does not satisfactorily meet the grounds on which an action is proposed. To put it otherwise, we are of the opinion that in order to fulfil the requirements of principles of natural justice, a show-cause notice should meet the following two requirements viz: (i) The material/grounds to be stated which according to the department necessitates an action; (ii) Particular penalty/action which is proposed to be taken. It is this second requirement which the High Court has failed to omit. We may hasten to add that even if it is not specifically mentioned in the show-cause notice but it can clearly and safely be discerned from the reading thereof, that would be sufficient to meet this requirement.” Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 20 of 24 26. Thus, I am of the view that show cause notice and termination letter is violative of principles of natural justice and cryptic and devoid of any detail. As already discussed, there are no particulars of the alleged encroachment on public land. The illegal construction was already demolished pursuant to the show cause notice. Consequently, the W.P. (C) 1914/2019 is allowed and the show cause notice dated 14.11.2018 and impugned order dated 06.02.2019/07.02.2019 is set aside. 27. This leads me to adjudicate the W.P.(C) 3902/2023 which is for quashing of impugned order dated 19.01.2023. Admittedly the plot in question is part of the district park and cannot be used for the CNG station. The relevant portion of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent in WP(C) 3902/2023 reads as under:- “3. That before adverting to the merits of the petition, the Respondent raises the following preliminary objections..... b. That the petition deserves outright dismissal as the petitioner is conceited attempt to grab public land. The above inferences/ mischievous intention get established in the light of comments of the Planning Department on permissibility of setting up CNG station at the site in question. Provision 12.13 of MPD- 2021 clearly stipulates that CNG station may be permitted in all use zones except in 'Regional Park Ridge', developed district parks and Zone 'O'. Landscape Department of the Respondent has clearly observed that the site falls within Basant Lok Park, and as Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 21 of 24 such setting up a CNG station is not feasible/permissible under the MPD 2021.... 4. That the following background of facts are crucial for the just adjudication of the matter..... c. It is· respectfully submitted that the petitioner obtained NOC for setting up of CNG station in the guise of sale of ancillary petroleum products to circumvent the rigours placed by the MPD-2021 for setting up of a CNG station. Pertinently, on permissibility of setting up CNG station at the above site in question, it is necessary to examine provision 12.13 of MPD- 2021 which clearly stipulates that CNG station may be permitted in all use zones except in 'Regional Park Ridge', developed district parks and Zone 'O". the Landscape Department of the Respondent No. l /DDA has clearly observed that the site falls within Basant Lok Park, and thus setting up a CNG station is not feasible/permissible in the said area.” 28. The operative portion of the impugned order dated 19.01.2023 reads as under:- Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 22 of 24 29. The order of 19.01.2023, rejecting the entitlement of the petitioner for consideration of alternate site is predicated on two aspects. a) The petitioner has to be a licensee of a petrol pump and gas godown site and b) The policy is applicable to those sites which are operational and got affected by Planned Development of Delhi resulting in closing of the business. 30. For the reasons as given in WP(C) 1914/2019, I have returned a Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 23 of 24 finding that the license of the petitioner has wrongly been terminated and hence, the first condition of the policy stands satisfied. 31. Since the licensee was wrongly cancelled, the site of the petitioner would have to be considered as operational and which has got affected by declaring his site as district part. Hence, condition No. 2 for the said policy to be applicable is also fulfilled. Consequently, the impugned order dated 19.01.2023 cannot be sustained. 32. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh, as to my mind the petitioner, prima facie , meets the criteria for allotment. The necessary orders shall be passed expeditiously and, in any case, not later than eight weeks from the date of release of this order. The case of the petitioner shall be considered as per extant rules. 33. The cancellation of allotment granted to the petitioner has been has been stayed vide order dated 26.02.2019. The said order shall continue till the case of the petitioner is considered and a speaking order is passed and for a period of one week thereafter. 34. The respondent shall also file an affidavit that once the possession of the plot in question is taken over it shall be the responsibility of the DDA to maintain the park. 35. The petitions are disposed of in aforesaid terms. JASMEET SINGH, J MARCH 24, 2026/NG (Corrected and released on 03.04.2026) Digitally Signed By:MAYANK Signing Date:04.04.2026 10:19:24 W.P.(C) 1914/2019 & W.P.(C) 3902/2023 Page 24 of 24 </div>