Delhi High Court · 2025

$~63 to 72 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5995/2025 and CM APPL. 27461/2025 LALIT MOHAN KAPUR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yogendra Handoo, ASC, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, ASC, Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, ASC, Mr. Raghav Alok, ASC with Mr. Garvit Solanki and Mr. Udbhav K. Garg, Advs. for R-1/NDMC. Mr. Shivam Sachdeva, SPC with Ms. Anju Gupta, Mr. Roshan Lal Goel and Mr. Bhuvan Goel, Advs. for R-2/UOI. 64 + W.P.(C) 13622/2025, CM APPL. 55834/2025 and CM APPL. 55835/2025 SAROJ TANDON SHOP 49 A .....Petitioner Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yogendra Handoo, ASC, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, ASC, Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, ASC, Mr. Raghav Alok, ASC with Mr. Garvit Solanki and Mr. Udbhav K. Garg, Advs. for NDMC. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/12/2025 at 13:06:23 65 + W.P.(C) 13654/2025, CM APPL. 56081/2025 and CM APPL. 56082/2025 SAROJ TANDON FLAT NO 35 .....Petitioner Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yogendra Handoo, ASC, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, ASC, Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, ASC, Mr. Raghav Alok, ASC with Mr. Garvit Solanki and Mr. Udbhav K. Garg, Advs. for NDMC. 66 + W.P.(C) 13655/2025, CM APPL. 55991/2025 and CM APPL. 55992/2025 SAROJ TANDON SHOP 35 A ANDB .....Petitioner Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yogendra Handoo, ASC, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, ASC, Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, ASC, Mr. Raghav Alok, ASC with Mr. Garvit Solanki and Mr. Udbhav K. Garg, Advs. for NDMC. 67 + W.P.(C) 16720/2025, CM APPL. 68643/2025 and CM APPL. 68644/2025 MAJOR S P MARWAH RETD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/12/2025 at 13:06:23 Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yogendra Handoo, ASC, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, ASC, Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, ASC, Mr. Raghav Alok, ASC with Mr. Garvit Solanki and Mr. Udbhav K. Garg, Advs. for R-1/NDMC. 68 + W.P.(C) 6428/2025 and CM APPL. 29318/2025 MAJOR S P MARWAH AND ORS .....Petitioners Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yogendra Handoo, ASC, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, ASC, Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, ASC, Mr. Raghav Alok, ASC with Mr. Garvit Solanki and Mr. Udbhav K. Garg, Advs. for R-1/NDMC. Mr. Ashish Goyal, SPC with Mr. Anurag Singhal, Adv. for R-2/UOI. 69 + W.P.(C) 6954/2025 and CM APPL. 31455/2025 GURVINDER SALUJA AND ANR .....Petitioners Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ANR This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/12/2025 at 13:06:23 .....Respondents Through: Mr. Piyush Beriwal and Ms. Ruchita Srivastava, Advs. for R-2 70 + W.P.(C) 7674/2025 MRS GAYATRI VACHANI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNUCIPAL COUNCIL & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yogendra Handoo, ASC, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, ASC, Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, ASC, Mr. Raghav Alok, ASC with Mr. Garvit Solanki and Mr. Udbhav K. Garg, Advs. for R-1/NDMC 71 + W.P.(C) 7839/2025 and CM APPL. 34533/2025 POONAM BAHL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yogendra Handoo, ASC, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, ASC, Mr. Ravi Krishan Chandna, ASC, Mr. Raghav Alok, ASC with Mr. Garvit Solanki and Mr. Udbhav K. Garg, Advs. for R-1/NDMC. 72 + W.P.(C) 8218/2025 and CM APPL. 35939/2025 SETH PROPERTIES .....Petitioner Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Ms. Anamika This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/12/2025 at 13:06:23 Ghai Niyazi, Ms. Nehmat Sethi, Ms. Kirti Bhardwaj and Mr. Adnan Naqash, Advs. versus NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Neha Rastogi, SPC for R-2/UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR O R D E R % 04.12.2025 1. The present batch of Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the notices of objection published by the New Delhi Municipal Council [hereinafter referred to as ‘NDMC’] for the purpose of assessment of property tax every year. In the aforesaid context, NDMC issued a Public Notice inviting objections. The Petitioners objection is with regard to Note-2 of the Objection Form issued by the NDMC, which reads as under:- “2. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in its judgment dated 22.01.2019 in C.A.No.903/30/2019 directed that the properties which have been assessed under NDMC (Determination of Annual Rent) Bye-Laws-2009 and which assessments have been accepted by the assessee will not be reopened. Accordingly the rateable value which has been decided/fixed earlier and recorded in NDMC prior to the pronouncement of the aforesaid judgment will remain same for this year for these properties. In respect of rest of cases, rateable value has been decided or under finalization according to Section-63(1) of the NDMC Act, 1994.” 2. Learned counsel representing the Petitioners submits that Note-2 is contrary to the directions issued by the Supreme Court in NDMC & Ors. v Association of Concerned Citizens of New Delhi & Ors. (2019) 15 SCC 303. He specifically relies upon Paragraph No.88 of This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/12/2025 at 13:06:23 the said judgment to contend that the Unit Area Method [hereinafter referred to as ‘UAM’] adopted by the NDMC had been struck down by the High Court, and that decision was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, however, did not reopen the assessments in respect of those assesses who had already accepted the said method. It is the case of the Petitioner that the same UAM could not be adopted for the purpose of future assessments. 3. Having noted the aforestated, at this stage, this Court deems it appropriate to provide a brief background of NDMC v Association of Concerned Citizens of New Delhi (Supra), since the core arguments of the Petitioners originate from this judgment. Pithily put, the NDMC introduced NDMC (Determination of Annual Rent) Bye-laws, 2009 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Bye-laws, 2009’], thereby introducing UAM as a new method for calculation of property tax. The constitutional validity of these Bye-laws came to be challenged before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 [hereinafter referred to as ‘COI’]. 4. While allowing the petitions, this Court vide judgment dated 10.08.2017, held that the Bye-laws, 2009 were ultra vires the New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994 [hereinafter referred to as ‘NDMC Act’], on the ground that the UAM, being a value-based system, was foreign to the statutory scheme of Section 63 of the NDMC Act, which tied ‘annual rent’ or ‘annual value’ to reasonable letting value. It was also held that the Bye-laws exceeded the rule-making power under Section 388(1)(A)(9) of the NDMC Act. 5. Thereafter, the Supreme Court, upheld the view taken by this Court, holding that Section 63(1) of NDMC Act, itself embodies a complete methodology tied to ‘annual rent’ based on reasonable This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/12/2025 at 13:06:23 letting value, and that the UAM under the impugned Bye-laws, being value-based rather than rent-based, was inconsistent with and foreign to Section 63 of the NDMC Act. Accordingly, the 2009 Bye-laws were held ultra vires the Act, though the Court, while exercising its power under Article 142 of the COI, protected the assessments of assessees who had already accepted and paid tax under the impugned regime while excluding from this protection the writ petitioners who had successfully challenged the Bye-laws in the High Court. The relevant directions of the Supreme Court are reproduced hereinafter: “87. When the matter came up on 6-3-2018, Mr. Sanjay Jain made a statement on behalf of NDMC that the revised guidelines have been framed and put on website, to which objections have been invited. He also stated that after receiving and considering the objections, the matter would be finalised at NDMC’s end. The respondent/assessee and some others also submitted their objections to the modified guidelines. These were looked into by the NDMC and decision thereon was taken by the Chairperson, NDMC under Bye-law 5(2) of the impugned Bye-laws after the Valuation Committee had given its recommendations for the year 2018-19. This decision dated 14-5-2018 of the Chairperson was handed over to the Court. As per this, various objections of the assessees were considered and decision taken thereon which are reflected in the tabulated form. Many respondents/assessees are still not satisfied with the decision taken on various aspects and the arguments. We, however, leave it to the NDMC to take a final call thereupon having due regard to the legal position on these aspects. 88. One last but very significant aspect is still required to be dealt with. The declaration of the impugned Bye-laws as ultra vires has created a difficult situation. These Bye-laws were framed in the year 2009. They were struck down by the High Court vide the impugned judgment dated 10-8-2017. They held the field from 2009-2017. While issuing notice in these special leave petitions on 22-9-2017, in respect of the direction of the High Court to pass reassessment order, this Court observed that it would be open to the NDMC not to pass such reassessment orders. That interim order has prevailed during the pendency of these appeals. Further, as already noted above, 95% of the assessees are agreeable to pay the tax as per 2009 Bye-laws. They have even paid the taxes on that basis. In these circumstances, to upset the applecart completely may not be appropriate. In such a peculiar situation, in exercise of This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/12/2025 at 13:06:23 powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, we direct that those assessees who have paid the tax as per 2009 Bye-laws, their assessments shall not be reopened. Another reason for taking this course of action is that these assessees are satisfied with the assessments under 2009 Bye-laws. However, it will not apply to the respondents herein, namely, those assessees who were the writ petitioners in the High Court. In their cases, the direction given by the High Court in the impugned judgment shall prevail.” 6. Following the judgment by the Supreme Court, the NDMC as also recorded in paragraph no.87 of NDMC v Association of Concerned Citizens of New Delhi (Supra), invited objections under Section 70 of the NDMC Act, against the assessment list for the year 2025-2026. Pursuant thereto, an objection form was issued by the NDMC and Note-2 contained therein is under challenge before this Bench. 7. Learned counsel representing the Respondents, on instructions from the concerned officials, submits that Note-2, which is under challenge, stands withdrawn. 8. Learned counsel representing the Petitioners, however, submits that notwithstanding the said statement and withdrawal, the Respondent-NDMC is likely, in future, to indulge again in the same UAM for the purpose of assessment. 9. The aforesaid stand taken by the Petitioner is untenable, in as much as this Court is not expected to issue a pre-emptory writ merely on the basis of a mere speculation that the Respondent may, in future, act in a particular manner. 10. However, learned counsel representing the Petitioners in W.P.(C) 13654/2025, W.P.(C) 13655/2025, W.P.(C) 16720/2025 and W.P. (C) 8218/2015, submits that NDMC has already passed re-assessment orders in accordance with Note-2. If that be so, it shall be open to the Petitioners to avail appropriate remedies, as may be This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/12/2025 at 13:06:23 available to them in law, in particular the appellate remedy provided under Section 115 of the NDMC Act, for challenging the individual assessments, if such assessments have indeed been made on the basis of Note-2. 11. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, all these Writ Petitions are accordingly dismissed. All pending applications also stand closed. 12. A photocopy of the Order passed today be kept in the connected matters. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. DECEMBER 04, 2025/sp/hr