CHITRA ADVERTISING SERVICE vs NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

Judgment text excerpt

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 25th March, 2026 + W.P.(C) 11988/2018 & CM APPL. 46410/2018 CHITRA ADVERTISING SERVICE .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Robin George and Mr. Yogesh Bhatt, Advocates. versus NORTH DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION .....Respondent Through: Ms. Namrata Mukim, Standing Counsel for MCD with Ms. Niharika Singh, Advocates with Mr. Mukesh Kumar, SO Advertisement Department. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL AMIT BANSAL, J. (Oral) 1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the demand notices dated 2nd May, 2018 and 15th October, 2018 issued by the respondent/MCD. 2. Briefly stated, the case set up by the petitioner is as under: 2.1 The petitioner was allotted two sites by the respondent for advertisement through unipoles on 23rd February, 2012 for a period of three years at a monthly license fee of Rs.71,111/- per site. 2.2 The petitioner could not install unipoles at the allotted sites since Public Works Department (‘PWD’), Government of NCT of Delhi was of Signature Not Verified Signed By:DHARMENDER W.P.(C) 11988/2018 Page 1 of 6 SINGH Signing Date:27.03.2026 17:40:49 the view that the sites allotted by the respondent were against the Delhi Outdoor Advertising Policy 2008. 2.3 Accordingly, the petitioner filed a writ petition being W.P.(C) 4375/2012, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 26th April, 2013. The operative part of the said order is set out below: “Learned counsel or the petitioner says that he is agreeable to the sites offered by the respondents for erecting two unipoles. His only concern is that instead of embedding the unipoles in the wall, the petitioner be given permission to erect the same adjacent to the wall. Ms Pushkarna says that she has no objection to the s