MCD's Negligence Led To Saket Building Collapse : Amicus Tells Supreme Court, Seeks Action Against Officials

The Municipal Corporation of Delhi's (MCD) repeated failure to act against unauthorised construction at a Saket building despite years of violations ultimately resulted in its collapse, causing six deaths and multiple injuries, Court-appointed amicus curiae Senior Advocate Ajit Kumar Sinha has told the Supreme Court.

In an intervention application filed before the Court, Sinha alleged that civic authorities "turned a blind eye" to illegal construction activities at Plot No. 261, Western Marg, Said-ul-Azaib, New Delhi, even though the property had repeatedly been booked for unauthorised construction since 2015. He has sought directions requiring the MCD and Delhi Police to explain how the illegal structure was allowed to continue and what action has been taken against officials responsible.

The application has been moved in the ongoing proceedings concerning rampant violations of building bye-laws and unauthorised conversion of residential premises into commercial establishments across the country.

A Bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice R. Mahadevan had, by an order dated April 25, appointed Sinha as amicus curiae and directed pan-India monitoring of such violations. All municipal corporations and municipalities in States and Union Territories were impleaded as parties in the matter.

Against this backdrop, Sinha has sought directions to the MCD to file an affidavit detailing surveys conducted and action taken against illegal constructions within its jurisdiction. He has also sought specific affidavits from the MCD and Delhi Police concerning the circumstances under which the Said-ul-Azaib building was permitted to remain standing despite repeated violations.

According to the application, the collapse occurred because the MCD failed to discharge its statutory obligations and neglected to seal the premises despite being aware of ongoing illegal construction.

Sinha submitted that the construction was carried out in violation of Sections 332, 346 and 348 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, as well as the Unified Building Bye Laws, 2016.

The application traces a long history of violations at the property. According to Sinha, the building owner had been carrying out unauthorised construction since 2015, adding floor after floor. The property was first booked for illegal construction of the basement, ground floor and first floor. It was subsequently booked again for unauthorised construction of the second and third floors, and later for the fourth and fifth floors, which were allegedly added recently before the building collapsed.

Sinha further pointed out that the building had been the subject of multiple court proceedings over the years.

In Shri Mangal Singh v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation, the owner challenged proposed demolition action by the municipal corporation. On December 8, 2020, the Delhi High Court directed that the owner be given a hearing before any decision was taken.

In another matter, Sunita R. Choudharie v. South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr, concerns were raised regarding the corporation's failure to take a decision despite the time granted by the High Court. The High Court nevertheless granted further time while making it clear that any unauthorised construction noticed at the site should be dealt with in accordance with law.

Despite repeated warnings and judicial scrutiny, the MCD failed to act, Sinha contended.

"That on 30.05.2026, the said property bearing number 261, Western Marg, Saidulajab, New Delhi collapsed in the evening around 7.30 pm, leaving 6 dead and at least 14 injured. The gross violation and illegal construction which went on since 2015, ultimately led to the horrific and unfortunate incident where innocent students and residents of the locality lost their lives whereas the beneficiary of said illegal structures as well as officers who failed to discharge their statutory obligations are still enjoying the benefits derived from the unauthorized construction and by letting the illegality continue in perpetuity," the report states.

The amicus also criticised the MCD's conduct in a recent Delhi High Court case, Abduk Sakir v. MCD, where the corporation's counsel allegedly stated that no construction activity was underway at the property. Sinha termed the statement false and argued that the suspension of an Assistant Engineer and a Junior Engineer after the collapse was merely a "whitewash".

Seeking wider remedial measures, Sinha has urged the Supreme Court to direct the MCD to conduct structural audits of buildings within its jurisdiction and undertake sealing and demolition of unsafe and unauthorised structures within a time-bound period.

The matter was mentioned before the Supreme Court yesterday by the amicus for urgent listing. However, the Court declined the request for urgent mentioning.

Case Details: LOGANATHAN v THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU|MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION Diary No(s). 17103/2026

Click Here To Read Order