HC-appointed team of lawyers to inspect coaching centres in Mukherjee Nagar

A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja said: “We additionally constitute an independent team, which will be headed by Mr Gautam Narayan, the learned amicus, which shall independently inspect the area and submit a report on the number of coaching centres found operating, and of those how many could be said to be in compliance with the UBBL…”

In order to assist Narayan — the amicus curiae appointed in the matter — to undertake this exercise, the HC asked the Delhi Legal Services Authority’s member secretary to place five empanelled lawyers with the amicus.

The amicus said that in many cases, although the earlier existing coaching institutes may have closed operations, new centres have sprung up on the same premises and are operational.

According to the HC, the constitution of this independent team for inspection is in addition to the “continued obligation of the MCD (Municipal Corporation of Delhi) and the other statutory authorities in constant compliance with the directions already issued”.

“We further direct Delhi Fire Services to undertake an independent exercise of verification of the area in question, and submit a report with respect to the number of non-confirming coaching centres that may be identified,” observed the bench.

During the hearing, the court was informed by the MCD — through its report — that 21 coaching institutes have closed their operations voluntarily.

The bench was told that as per the report, 25 coaching centres have been issued notices of sealing, and out of these, six have already been sealed; and that the “MCD will be taking peremptory action against the remainder forthwith”.

The matter will be taken up after three weeks. The court said it would also hear a petition that day, by the Coaching Federation of India against the inclusion of coaching centres in the definition of ”educational buildings” which requires them to employ certain specific compliances for fire safety etc.

The counsel said that certain compliances have been made applicable to education buildings (like a school or college) and the same are not applicable to a coaching centre.

“Why should it not be made applicable, and why the attachment of these conditions would be arbitrary, is a question you have to answer. The principal question that we propose is that even if you have come to establish a coaching centre in an area where mixed land use is permissible, once such an activity commences do you remain residential or are deprived of the character?” said the bench orally.

The court also asked the MCD to file a fresh status report, setting out the total number of coaching centres which may be identified as operational in Mukherjee Nagar as of now.