Limits on committee power over residential property: sealing and demolition require statutory authority and Article 300-A compliance.

The Monitoring Committee's remit was limited to dealing with misuse of residential premises for commercial purposes and related encroachment issues, so it could not seal or order demolition of purely residential private property not used commercially. Where unauthorised construction or deviation is alleged in such premises, the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 supplies the relevant demolition, alteration and appeal procedure. Any interference with possession or deprivation of property must also comply with Article 300-A and occur only by authority of law. The Committee therefore could not bypass the statutory scheme or assume powers not expressly conferred on it.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Monitoring Committee had jurisdiction to seal and direct demolition of purely residential premises on private land that were not being used for commercial purposes, and whether such action could be sustained without recourse to the statutory procedure under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957.

Analysis: The Monitoring Committee had been constituted for a limited purpose, namely, to deal with misuse of residential premises for commercial purposes and, later, with encroachments on public land and unauthorized colonies. The record showed that its earlier reports and this Court's earlier orders were confined to commercial misuse, mixed land use, and encroachment-related issues. No prior authorization was shown for sealing purely residential premises situated on private land and not used commercially. Where unauthorized construction or deviation in such premises is alleged, the statutory scheme under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 provides the relevant remedies, including action under the provisions dealing with demolition, alteration, and appeals. Deprivation of property or interference with possession must also conform to Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and can occur only by authority of law. The Committee could not bypass the statutory procedure or assume powers not conferred upon it.

Conclusion: The Monitoring Committee had no jurisdiction to seal or order demolition of the residential premises covered by Report No.149, and its action was unsustainable. The sealing action and consequential notices were quashed, and the premises were directed to be desealed and restored to the owners.

---