ORDER 1. UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following I.A. No. 22 2. By our order dated 07.05.2007, pursuant to what has been submitted by learned Solicitor General and learned Amicus- Curiae, several agencies were required to indicate their stand on various aspects relating to the feasibility of the Master Plan 2021 being implemented effectively. It appears that except the Delhi Integrated Multi Modal Transport System (in short 'DIMT S') and Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (in short 'DMRC'), no other agency has filed any affidavit indicating its stand. Without having the affidavits of these agencies, it may not be possible to work out the details so far as the feasibility of an effective implementation of the Master Plan 2021 is concerned. As a last chance, two weeks' time is granted to the agencies who have not filed their response, to file their response. It is made clear that adverse inference shall be drawn if the affidavits are not placed on record within the aforesaid time. Copies of the affidavits filed be supplied to learned Solicitor General and learned Amicus- Curiae. 3. Copy of the Report of the Monitoring Committee (Report No.38) dated 21st July, 2007) be given to learned counsel for the MCD to respond to what has been stated in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the report. 4. We have perused the report of the Monitoring Committee so far as demand of reasons for sealing are concerned. It is stated by learned AC that the reasons are available in the files and photocopies can be made available by the MCD. We direct accordingly. So far as paragraph- 4 of the report is concerned, let MCD and DDA file their response. 5. I.A. No.2138 shall be placed on board when this aspect is taken up. Considered the suggestions of the Monitoring Committee. Time for meeting the deadline under the Notification dated 22nd June, 2007 is extended till 16th August, 2007. I.A. Nos. 2111, 2112, 2113 AND 2114 6. Several petitions have been filed by the Professional s. The Monitoring Committee has indicated its views in paragraph- 7 of the report. Let response of the applicants be filed within two weeks. Copy of Report No.3 8 be given to learned Solicitor General. The interim order in respect of the professional s shall continue until further orders. 7. Several petitions have been filed by the Professional s. The Monitoring Committee has indicated its views in paragraph- 7 of the report. Let response of the applicants be filed within two weeks. Copy of Report No.3 8 be given to learned Solicitor General. The interim order in respect of the professional s shall continue until further orders. 7. The order in the case of professional s shall apply to W P(C) No.338 of 2007 also. The response of the MCD and the Govt. of NCT of Delhi to the views expressed in Report No.38 in paragraph- 8 relating to classification of roads shall be filed within two weeks. 8. In paragraph- 11 of the report, it has been stated that because of stay orders passed by various courts, the work of demolition of unauthorized construction is stalled. Reference in this context is made to a letter of the Executive Engineer, P W D , Division No.N- 11 2 , Government of Delhi, dated 4th May, 2007 . Learned counsel for the MCD/D D A/ N C T shall bring to the notice of the concerned courts that the interim applications are to be disposed of within a period of six weeks from today. Necessary information be given to the court within a period of one week so that the parties concerned can be informed about this order. 9. So far as the recommend actions contained in paragraph- 14 are concerned, let the Union of India file its response. The response to be filed shall be considered along with the response to be filed by various agencies, as directed earlier. I.A. NO.1 5- A Let DDA's response be filed within three weeks. I.A. Nos.2001 and 2043 10. Latest position so far as I.A. Nos. 2001 and 2043 are concerned, shall be indicated within three weeks. I.A. Nos.2031 - 2032 and 2051- 2052 Call after three weeks. Rejoinder, if any, to the response be filed within three weeks. I.A. Nos.2057 - 2058, 2061- 2062, 2066, 2087, 2070- 2071, 2082, 2091, 2080 - 2081, 2098- 2096, 2097, 2092- 2093, 2094- 2095 11. In these I.As., the DDA prayed for some time to file its response. Let the response be filed within a period of two weeks. I.A. Nos. 2096 – 2097 12. It is stated that there are some further developments in I.As. 2096- 2097. In these I.As., the DDA prayed for some time to file its response. Let the response be filed within a period of two weeks. I.A. Nos. 2096 – 2097 12. It is stated that there are some further developments in I.As. 2096- 2097. Let the applicant move the Monitoring Committee so that its response can be filed within a week. The Monitoring Committee is free to take such action on the application, as deemed proper. I.A. Nos. 2049 - 2050, 2083, 2085- 2086 13. The response by DDA/MC D shall be filed within a week. I.A. Nos. 2072, 2073, 2064 and an application filed by Federation of Delhi Traders' Association shall be taken up along with the main writ petition. I.A. Nos. 2076 - 2077 and 2122 14. The I.As. are permitted to be withdrawn. I.A. No. 3 in W P 464/2006 15. This matter shall be taken up along with main writ petition. I.A. Nos. 2088 - 2089 Issue notice. I.A. No. 2084 List in due course. I.A. No. 2085 None appears. Call after four weeks. I.A. No. 2099 - 2100 DDA to file its response within two weks. I.A. No.2115 Issue notice. DDA to file its response within two weeks. I.A. No. 2123 – 2124 16. On an appropriate application being filed before the Monitoring Committee, the Committee shall explore the possibility of granting two weeks' time to remove the articles stored. The IAs. are accordingly disposed of. I.A. No. 2109 - 2110 Heard. 17. Time is extended till 30th September, 2007. De- sealing may be done for the purpose of shifting only. I.As. are disposed of accordingly. I.A. No. 2119 – 2220 18. It is stated that the property has already been de-sealed. IAs are disposed of accordingly. I.A. No. 37- 38 in W P 463/2006 Adjourned. I.A. No. 2132 - 2133, 2128- 2129, 2134- 2135, 2136- 2137 and 2139 19. Some confusion appears to have arisen in the mind of several agencies and parties about the import of the order dated 07.05.2007. What was prohibited by the said order related to sanctions that were being granted and it was made clear that no further sanctions after 07.05.2007 were to be granted. It was not intended to cover cases where construction was permissible on the basis of the 1990 Master Pl a n, as modified by the modifications in 1998 . What was prohibited by the said order related to sanctions that were being granted and it was made clear that no further sanctions after 07.05.2007 were to be granted. It was not intended to cover cases where construction was permissible on the basis of the 1990 Master Pl a n, as modified by the modifications in 1998 . The para meters indicated by this Court in 2004 (9) SCC 569 News Item published in Hindustan Times titled 'And Quit Flow Maily Yamuna' in Re have to be taken into account while dealing with the issue as to whether the sanction, if any, prior to 07.05.2007 is in line with it. The restraint shall not operate in respect of non residential buildings meant for public utility services like hospitals, police stations, fire stations and those meant for additional infrastructure in line with the decision referred to above. The I.As. are accordingly disposed of. I.A. NO.2125 20. The Monitoring Committee shall file its response within four weeks. I.A. No...... in I.A. No. 22 in W P(C) No. 4677/1985 (Filed by Mr. R. Nedumaran, Advocate) Issue notice to the Monitoring Committee to have its response. List immediately after a week. Writ Petition (C) No. 241 of 2007 Issue notice. MCD to file its response within four weeks. I.A. No. 2121 21. It is stated that the demolitions have already been carried out. If that be so, there may not be any need for a further sealing. The MCD shall indicate if it has any further reason to seal the premises. The I.As. for interim orders shall be listed on 21st August, 2007. 22. So far as the hearing of the main writ petition is concerned, list the matter on 09.10.2007. Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, learned Amicus has stated her inability to assist learned Amicus- Curiae. In her place, Mr. Kamal Gupta, learned counsel is permitted to assist Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Amicus- Curiae.