‘Trying to nitpick direction’: HC raps MCD for failing to shut down coaching centres violating norms

On April 5, the HC had directed the constitution of an independent inspecting team — headed by advocate Gautam Narayan, the amicus curiae appointed in the matter — to inspect the area and submit a report on the total number of coaching centres operating, and of those, how many were complying with the Unified Building Bye-Laws (UBBL), 2016, and the Master Plan of Delhi (MPD), 2021.

Narayan stated that certain coaching centres, which were stated to have been shut down as per the MCD, were found operational under a new management or name. During the course of the hearing, a division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja orally said: “You (MCD) are trying to nitpick the direction, which was to shut them down… Shut it down and file a report. The job that the MCD is supposed to do, the amicus curiae is doing. You created this mess. This is no time for clarification.”

Narayan, meanwhile, submitted that inspection was carried out on two dates, and that the team had inspected 70 per cent of Mukherjee Nagar, Nehru Vihar, and several places in GTB (Guru Tegh Bahadur) Nagar. He further said that a lot of premises have been converted into establishments “referred to as libraries”, adding that these are rooms where cubicles are carved out for people to study.

“Like We Work?” the HC orally asked, to which Narayan replied: “Kind of.” After several hearings, the HC directed the MCD/ DDA (Delhi Development Authority) to forthwith take action to ensure that certain premises, which are non-compliant and in “violation” of the court’s earlier “sealing direction” are sealed. It also called for a report by the authorities on this aspect, asking them to file it “not later than Monday (April 13)”.

On fire NOC (no objection certificate) and characterisation of a building, in which coaching centres were being run in these areas, the HC took note of the broad classification of buildings under the UBBL. It further said that residential buildings refer to structures where sleeping accommodation is provided for normal residential purposes.
“It is that primary use which shall ordinarily govern the phrase residential building,” said the bench, adding that on a prima facie evaluation, the terms “used for” and “involving” would be “determinative of characterising an educational building”.

The HC also called for a fresh survey by the MCD and the Delhi Fire Service in certain categories of buildings — mentioned by it — which are found to be non-compliant of the laws, adding that these shall be “duly identified along with full particulars of its occupants”.

“Any electrical apparatus that still continues to exist inside premises used for educational purposes be it staircase which may be injurious to public safety are also to be relocated with due expedition,” directed the bench.