MUKUL MUDGAL,J. .1. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi has filed two applications being CM Nos.1238/2007 and 239/2007 praying for the discharge of the Monitoring Committee and Court Commissioners appointed by this Court vide its orders dated 23rd March and 18th May, 2006. 2. Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad, the learned senior counsel for the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, hereinafter referred to as the MCD, has challenged the appointment of the Monitoring Committee and the powers vested with the Monitoring Committee and the Court Commissioners on the ground that the said orders impinge on the doctrine of separation of powers as well as violate the doctrine of judicial restraint and the powers vested with the Commissioners and Monitoring Committee are far in excess of the relevant statutory provision namely Order 26 Rule 9 of CPC. .3. The submissions of Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad are summarized as follows:- A. In the course of the execution and implementation of the directions of the Court, on many occasions, disputed questions arise as to the legality of the construction or the legality of an activity. This can be decided, by either those who are statutorily empowered to take such decisions or by this Court. For the latter purpose, unquestionably the court has the power to appoint a Commissioner to give its recommendations on which a decision is taken by this Court after hearing all affected parties. The judicial power to decide disputed questions cannot be as a matter of law, be delegated to the court commissioner. There have been large numbers of occasions where disputed issues have been sought to be resolved by the committee. B. A part of the order dated 18th May, 2006 constituted a Monitoring Committee and further directed the statutory authorities like the Commissioner of MCD, Chief Secretary, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Vice Chairman of the DDA, the Divisional Commissioner of Delhi, Chief Conservator of Forest and the Ridge Management Board to report to this Committee, which is contrary to law. By this Courts order dated 18th May, 2006, the Monitoring Committee was vested with the power to issue appropriate directions to the authorities concerned. Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad submitted that the statutory authorities have to function in accordance with the statute that governs their functioning. The statute ensures their independence. By this Courts order dated 18th May, 2006, the Monitoring Committee was vested with the power to issue appropriate directions to the authorities concerned. Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad submitted that the statutory authorities have to function in accordance with the statute that governs their functioning. The statute ensures their independence. If they fail to exercise the discretion in accordance with the law and or act contrary to law, the appropriate writ, order or direction can always be issued to statutory authorities. However, requiring statutory authorities to report to a Committee set up by the Court which has no statutory backing or authority, it was submitted, is contrary to law and against the Constitution. C. The order dated 18th May, 2006 also directed that the Monitoring Committee evaluate the amount of penalty, which should be recovered. It was submitted that if there is unauthorized construction or encroachment, apart from taking action to prevent such activity if a penalty is to be levied it can only be in accordance with a law that authorizes the imposition of penalty. There are penalties prescribed under the statute and the rules but those have to be enforced after judicial adjudication by the appropriate court. D. By order dated 23rd March, 2006, this Court appointed Court Commissioners giving direction to the Commissioner of MCD to take immediate action on the receipt of the report of the court commissioners and further giving an authority to the court commissioners to directly inform the Commissioner of Police. It was, thus, submitted that what has been put in place by these orders is virtually a parallel administration. E. It was further submitted that the directions in these orders are not authorized by the law and the Constitution but are also contrary to the express provisions of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957(hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Statute sets up machinery for implementation of its provisions including the town planning laws. Where there is failure of the statutory machinery to act, unquestionably writs of mandamus or any other appropriate writs would lie however setting up alternative machinery to carry out orders of this court, it is submitted, is not contemplated by law. 4. The Statute sets up machinery for implementation of its provisions including the town planning laws. Where there is failure of the statutory machinery to act, unquestionably writs of mandamus or any other appropriate writs would lie however setting up alternative machinery to carry out orders of this court, it is submitted, is not contemplated by law. 4. In support of his plea with the regard to the doctrine of separation of powers the learned Senior Counsel for the MCD cited the following judgments of the Honble Supreme Court: - Rai Sahib Ram Jawaya Kapur vs. State of Punjab AIR 1955 SC 549 ; Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225 ; Indira Nehru Gandhi vs. Raj Narain (1975) Supp. SCC 1; I.R. Coelho vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2007) 2 SCC 1 and M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India and Ors. (2008) 1 SCC 407 . In support of his plea on exercise of judicial restraint, the learned Senior Counsel relied upon the following judgments: -State of Himachal Pradesh vs. A parent of a Student of Medical College, Simla and ors. (1985) 3 SCC 169 ; Muni Suvrat Swami Jain SMP Sangh vs. Arun Nathuram Gaikwad (2006) 8 SCC 590 ; Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs. Workmen, Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2007) 1 SCC 408 ; Asif Hameed vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir (1989) Supp. 2 SCC 364 and State of Uttar Pradesh and another vs. Johri Lal (2004) 4 SCC 714 . In support of his plea that the Court Commissioners can be vested with only limited powers, the learned Senior Counsel cited the following judgments of the Honble Supreme Court:- Guruvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee vs. C.K. Rajan (2003) 7 SCC 546 ; Divanchee Bar and Restaurant , Hyderabad vs. Polic Commissioner, Hyderabad and ors. AIR 1986 AP 149 ; J and K Board of School Education vs. D.B. N. Vidya Mandir, AIR 1994 JandK 16. 5. AIR 1986 AP 149 ; J and K Board of School Education vs. D.B. N. Vidya Mandir, AIR 1994 JandK 16. 5. The pleas of Shri R.P. Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioner in response to the application filed by the applicant were as follows: - (i) Various proceedings/orders passed by this Court in this very case from 23rd July, 2003 will show that those who are responsible to comply with the statutory provisions of the Act have not only failed to perform their duties but were found to be indulging in permitting illegal and unauthorized construction/commercialization of residential properties. (ii) In some cases plans were sanctioned for construction of residential buildings but buildings constructed were of commercial nature. The parameters for constructing residential buildings are altogether different than constructing commercial buildings. The building plan sanctioned permitted construction of two dwelling units but in most of the cases there are 8 to 10 dwelling units in a plot ad measuring about 200 sq. yards. (iii)On the basis of report submitted by the Three-Member Committee of Lawyers constituted by this Court on 14th July, 2003 it became apparent that there had been complete break down of the Municipal Administration and it appears that not only the illegal/unauthorized construction and commercialization had been taking place at the instance and with the connivance of the Municipal staff, but all unscrupulous builders and politicians appear to be part of a bigger conspiracy to turn the city into a slum to serve their personal monetary gains. (iv) This Court had passed orders from time to time and gave adequate opportunities to the respondents to mend themselves. On an undertaking given by the Addl. Solicitor General on 18th January, 2006 besides others, this Court was pleased to pass the following order: We appreciate the desire of all learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. Gopal Subramamium, Learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for MCD that a permanent mechanism for monitoring as well as checking unauthorized construction need to be put in place so as to assist this Court as well as the Municipal Corporation of Delhi in carrying out this task. (v) It was, thus, submitted that it had become necessary to set up a permanent mechanism to over-see the functioning of the respondent. (v) It was, thus, submitted that it had become necessary to set up a permanent mechanism to over-see the functioning of the respondent. (vi) It is essential for the civic authorities concerned to report on these matters to the Monitoring Committee and the Court Commissioners, otherwise, they will just be ineffective in discharging their complex responsibilities, requiring consultation between various agencies and ensuring implementation of Court orders passed from time to time. 6. In support of his pleas, the counsel for the petitioner laid emphasis on the following judgments of the Honble Supreme Court: - Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. (1984) 2 SCR 67 ; M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India, 2004 (6) SCC 588; M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (2006) 3 SCC 429 ; Gurvayoor Devaswom Managing Committee vs. C.K. Rajan (2003) 7 SCC 546 ; Suo Moto vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. AIR 2005 Rajasthan 82; M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (2004) 12 SCC 118 and Common Cause (A Regd. Society)Vs. Union of India and Ors. (2008)5 SCC 51. 7. It was submitted by the Court Commissioners that none of them have, in fact, usurped the powers of the MCD and have only been pointing out irregularities, illegalities in constructions and other infractions. They further stated that action has been taken by the MCD pursuant to their suggestions strictly in accordance with law and the statutory remedies are not being by-passed or eroded. They submitted that save and except the fact that the writs filed before the learned Single Judges have been heard by the Division Bench of this court, there is no other instance of by-passing of the statutory remedies. It was also submitted that the order dated 18th January, 2006 appointing the Monitoring Committee and the Court Commissioners is a consensual order. 8. In the course of his submissions, Mr. Prasad also handed over a scheme to augment the working of the MCD and the grievance regarding the unauthorized constructions and the manner and the method of their redressal. He submitted that this suggested Scheme would redress effectively the grievances raised in the writ petition and those issues raised by various orders passed by this Court from time to time in the present writ petition. 9. He submitted that this suggested Scheme would redress effectively the grievances raised in the writ petition and those issues raised by various orders passed by this Court from time to time in the present writ petition. 9. The suggestions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Court Commissioners were also invited so as to suggest objections, alterations, modifications or additions to the said proposal given by the MCD. The Counsel for the MCD stated that after considering the inputs from its various departments the proposed Scheme has been formulated. 10. A brief summary of the proposals given by the MCD is as follows:- A. Institutional new changes are to be introduced within the statutory and constitutional setup which would - i) Aim at transparency at all the levels for combating the menace of unauthorized constructions. ii) Ensure that there is no mix up at the detection stage and action stage. iii) Involve all the officers of the department in the exercise right from J.E. till the top most officers. B. Giving topmost priority to the detection part for combating this problem and on the general complaint that despite the unauthorized construction being noticed, no action is being taken, it is proposed that the whole system of booking of unauthorized construction shall be computerized and made on-line and the following procedures will be followed: - i) As soon as the municipal staff detects any unauthorized construction or comes to the notice of the MCD through any other source, the required details will be posted on a formated sheet fed in the computer. ii) The computer would generate a Performa of all the mandatory actions required under the Act. iii) Once any complaint is registered in the system, the system would forward the same to all concerned officers for taking action as per provisions of the Act. iv) The status of the case would be available for monitoring purpose to senior officers. v) Once the unauthorized construction is detected and registered, action would be taken against the unauthorized construction within a time bound manner. vi) Any complaint received and registered would be acted upon within four weeks so as to ensure that no grievance goes unheard. iv) The status of the case would be available for monitoring purpose to senior officers. v) Once the unauthorized construction is detected and registered, action would be taken against the unauthorized construction within a time bound manner. vi) Any complaint received and registered would be acted upon within four weeks so as to ensure that no grievance goes unheard. C. To counter the menace of corruption it is proposed that the detection of unauthorized construction at the first level shall be by the Junior Engineers and Assistant Engineers of the concerned zones under the supervision of Executive Engineers. Superintending Engineer would ensure that the separate teams detecting and ensuring action, act as per law and if either of the teams/officers fails, it would be the primary responsibility of the superintending engineer of the zone and if any dereliction of duty is noticed he would initiate appropriate action against the erring officers. However, the ultimate responsibility of unauthorized construction would lie on the part of the Deputy Commissioner who will ensure that if any of the Officers fails to take any action appropriate disciplinary proceedings would be initiated against the erring officers within the fixed time frame. D. Even the Deputy Commissioner is not being kept immune to the disciplinary proceedings. It is hereby proposed to constitute a Nodal Steering Committee with the following officers as its members: I) The Additional Commissioner (Engineering) II) The Chief Vigilance Officer III)The Chief Town Planner IV) The Chief Law Officer. This Committee would monitor the overall working of zones and its officers including the highest officers of the zone. It will meet at least once every month and would review the functioning of the zonal staff and forward its monthly report to the Commissioner. If any laxity is noticed in any zone, it would also recommend action against the erring officers. E. To make unauthorized structure non-habitable and unprofitable, it is proposed that supplies of electricity and water are cut off to such buildings which have unauthorized construction and a request be made to the DISCOMS and Delhi Jal Board not to issue any connections in the buildings which are being occupied without obtaining completion certificates. Once the preconditions of obtaining the completion certificate is strictly enforced by all the agencies it would have a ripple effect and would deter the persons to indulge in the activities leading to unauthorized construction. Once the preconditions of obtaining the completion certificate is strictly enforced by all the agencies it would have a ripple effect and would deter the persons to indulge in the activities leading to unauthorized construction. Thus, by aiming at transparency in registration of complaints and by ensuring time bound action against illegal and unauthorized constructions, it is submitted that the aforesaid proposed steps would keep the involvement and obligation of each officer and authority of the corporation alive towards the menace of unauthorized construction and would also act as a deterrent to the officers and public alike thereby negating the need for continuance of the Monitoring Committee and the Court Commissioners. 11. The comments submitted by the Court Commissioners on the proposed Scheme given by the MCD are as under: - (i) The Proposed Scheme does not give any reason for the failure of MCD to check/curb unauthorized constructions and encroachments under the existing MCD mechanism. Presently, there is nothing placed before this Court to have the comparative study of proposed scheme with the existing internal mechanism of MCD which is sought to streamlined or replaced by a new one. (ii) The proposed Scheme dated 30.7.2008 only deals with ongoing unauthorized constructions and does not give any measures for actions against encroachments on Govt. lands nor does it address anything about action against existing/already booked unauthorized constructions under the Act. Thus, the Proposed Scheme is only confined to check future unauthorized constructions and does not deal with the issue of existing unauthorized constructions and encroachments. (iii)The proposed mechanism should make the senior officers of MCD and other authorities directly responsible to this Court for enforcing and implementation of law in a timely and effective manner by their staff members as per the duties assigned to them under law and otherwise. (iv) The proposed mechanism does not suggest any coordination amongst various authorities like MCD, DDA, Revenue Authorities, LandDO, CPWD, Delhi Police etc. There are instances where disputes or confusion have arisen as to who is the land owning agency or under whose jurisdiction the property falls or which authority is to take action. In all such cases, a proper co-ordination is needed amongst all the above mentioned public departments to resolve such controversies so that the action against any illegality is not delayed or prolonged on account of any such confusion or controversy. In all such cases, a proper co-ordination is needed amongst all the above mentioned public departments to resolve such controversies so that the action against any illegality is not delayed or prolonged on account of any such confusion or controversy. There should also be a Co-ordination Committee consisting of Nodal Officer of each Department/Authority which preferably should be the rank of Additional Commissioner or equivalent. (v) In the proposal given by MCD it is stated that they would strengthen the Building Department by deputing sufficient number of officials from the rank of Junior Engineer to Superintending Engineers. Presently, it is understood that there is only about 30% of sanctioned staff strength available with MCD. If this is so, the proposal given by MCD would require the satisfaction of this Court as to how and when the proposed staff strength would be available to MCD without which such proposal would not yield any results thereby defeating the very purpose of the exercise. (vi) The Proposed Scheme does not address the issue of regularization of unauthorized constructions which are compoundable under law. Such regularization if done timely and properly will give substantial financial support to MCD to develop necessary infrastructures. This Court may consider the issuance of time bound directions to MCD for taking up and completing the regularization process. (vii) The Proposed Scheme does not aspire any confidence regarding the steps MCD and other authorities will take to protect the public land retrieved from the encroachers in the last two years. (viii) The proposed Scheme may incorporate a provision for a weekly/fortnightly Certificate under the signature of Junior Engineer to the effect that there is no unauthorized ongoing constructions and/or encroachments on Public/Govt. land and it must give details regarding the unauthorized ongoing constructions and/or encroachments on Public/Govt. land during the relevant week, if any, along with proposed specific action, to the concerned Deputy Commissioner(s) with a copy to Head Quarters who should maintain records of each such weekly certificate(s) in their respective Zones and Head Quarters, MCD, Town Hall. It should also be open to public inspection on the lines similar to those followed in the offices of Sub Registrars who register the documents. 12. The learned Senior Advocate, Sh. It should also be open to public inspection on the lines similar to those followed in the offices of Sub Registrars who register the documents. 12. The learned Senior Advocate, Sh. Rakesh K. Khanna, Court Commissioner for Rohini and south zone further gave the following suggestions for the improvement of the proposed Scheme as put forward by the MCD:- A. MCD needs to set up a permanent in-house mechanism for redressal of complaints as well as for attending to the complaints of unauthorized/illegal construction and encroachment of public lands. B. MCD maintains a Building Plan Register which should simultaneously be put on the MCD website and every plan sanctioned should be put on the website on the date of sanction. C. The Construction Watch Register (CWR) which the MCD is supposed to maintain should be put on its website for every property, for which plans have been sanctioned by the competent authority and should contain necessary details. The owner of the property/builder should inform the authorities concerned every six months, the stage of construction. These informations should be updated on the website in the CWR forthwith not later than 3 days of their receipt. D. Sanctioning of Plan should be made mandatory for every building, whether falling in the DDA Colonies, Regularized Colonies, and/or unauthorized regularized colonies, area located within the Lal Dora or extended Abadi Area and or any other land area located within the territory of Delhi. E. Every complaint, received by MCD, whether by E-mail, written or oral or by any other means, regarding unauthorized/illegal construction or encroachment of public land should be put on the website of the MCD within 24 hours of its receipt. F. MCD should create a Centralized and Zone wise complaint cell with telephone facility (on the line of Tel. No.100 of the Police Control Room). On receipt of complaint in the centralized complaint center, it should be immediately referred to the concerned MCD zone/office on the same day and should be put on the website of that zone as well. G. In case the complaints pertains to an on-going illegal construction and/or encroachment of public land, it should be attended within 24 hours of its receipt. The Action Taken Report (ATR) should be placed on the website. The ATR on every complaint should be updated on the website every week till the final Action taken report is posted. G. In case the complaints pertains to an on-going illegal construction and/or encroachment of public land, it should be attended within 24 hours of its receipt. The Action Taken Report (ATR) should be placed on the website. The ATR on every complaint should be updated on the website every week till the final Action taken report is posted. H. MCD may set up a High Powered Committee headed by Additional Commissioner (preferably an IAS Officer), Chief Vigilance Officer, an IPS Cadre officer, Dy. Commissioner MCD of the concerned zone and the Superintending Engineer of the zone. In case the complainant is not satisfied with the action taken or the progress of the action, on his complaint, he may approach the Appellate Authority, after two weeks of his complaint and in case of on-going unauthorized construction or encroachment, after 3 days of the complaint. The Appellate Authority should hear the complainant within one week of the receipt of the complaint. If the complainant does not wish to be heard and/or disclose his identity, the Appellate Authority should look into the grievance, on its own, and inform the complainant accordingly and also put the decision on the website. I. In case, the complainant is still not satisfied with the decision of the appellate Authority, Complainant may approach the OMBUDSMAN to be appointed by the MCD. The Ombudsman shall be a Retired High Court Judge, appointed in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, Delhi. The Ombudsman may draw his own procedure to hear the complaint. J. It is suggested that all the maps i.e. to say the Master Plan of Delhi, the Zonal Plans of Delhi, Sub Zonal Plans, Layout Plans of every colony clearly indicating the ownership of the land i.e. Government, Institutional or private as well as land under acquisition, should be put on the MCD, DDA and Delhi government Websites. The information available on the website will be available to all concerned to know the actual ownership of the land before purchasing the same and it will enable the Public spirited persons to assist the authorities in preventing the encroachment of the public land. K. It has been proposed by the Government as well as the MCD that the building plans sanctioning procedure will be simplified if the Architects registered with Architect Council/MCD will be permitted to do this job and this proposal may be implemented. 13. K. It has been proposed by the Government as well as the MCD that the building plans sanctioning procedure will be simplified if the Architects registered with Architect Council/MCD will be permitted to do this job and this proposal may be implemented. 13. In response to the proposed scheme suggested by the MCD for permanent internal mechanism, the counsel for the petitioner urged that the same was not feasible for the same reasons he had given to oppose the present application filed by the MCD. 14. We have also noted the pleas of the Court Commissioners that they do not wish to continue further as Court Commissioners and that the court should pass appropriate orders on their plea. Mr. Khanna submitted that in any event even if they were to continue the payment to the court Commissioners may be suspended. 15. We have heard the arguments at length on the legal issues addressed by Mr. Prasad and Mr. Sharma, supplemented by the Court Commissioners. We are, however, of the prima facie view that by the very nature of the scope of the powers of the Monitoring Committee and the Court Commissioners, their appointment can only be for a given period and not permanently. The Court Commissioners are required to furnish on the spot information to the Courts but cannot be a permanent feature of the exercise of Municipal powers. The appointment of Court Commissioners as a continuous/permanent check against the public officials discharging their duties under a statute or under common law cannot be permitted indefinitely. 16. We are, however, of the view that in consonance with the alternate mechanism suggested by the respondent-MCD with the following modifications in the Scheme, as suggested by the Court Commissioners or this court, the following Scheme is envisaged: 1. MCD should not onlydeal with ongoing unauthorized constructions but also take actions against encroachments on Govt. lands and against existing/already booked unauthorized constructions under the Act. 2. The senior officers of MCD like Additional Commissioners and equivalent will be directly responsible to this Court for enforcing and implementation of law in a timely and effective manner by their staff members as per the duties assigned to them under law and otherwise. .3. The detection of unauthorized construction at the first level shall be carried out by the Junior Engineers and Assistant Engineers of the concerned zones under the supervision of Executive Engineers. .3. The detection of unauthorized construction at the first level shall be carried out by the Junior Engineers and Assistant Engineers of the concerned zones under the supervision of Executive Engineers. Superintending Engineer would ensure that the separate teams for detection and ensuring action, act as per law and if either of the teams/officers fails, it would be the primary responsibility of the superintending engineer of the zone and if any dereliction of duty is noticed he would initiate appropriate action against the erring officers. However, the ultimate responsibility of unauthorized construction would lie on .the part of the Additional Commissioners of the concerned zones who will ensure that if any of the Officers fails to take any action appropriate disciplinary proceedings would be initiated against the erring officers within the fixed time frame. 4. A Nodal Steering Committee is to be constituted with the following officers as its members: I) The Additional Commissioner (Engineering) II) The Chief Vigilance Officer III) The Chief Town Planner IV) The Chief Law Officer. This Committee would monitor the overall working of zones and its officers including the highest officers of the zone. It will meet at least once every month and would review the functioning of the zonal staff and forward its monthly report to the Commissioner. If any laxity is noticed in any zone, it would also recommend action against the erring officers. 5. A Co-ordination Committee consisting of nodal officers of the rank of Additional Commissioner or equivalent of MCD, DDA, Revenue Authorities, LandDO, CPWD and Delhi Police shall meet once a month. 6. MCD would ensure that within a period of six months from today it fills up all its vacancies and recruits staff equivalent to the extent of its sanctioned strength. 7. MCD would ensure that unauthorized constructions which are compoundable under the law are regularized on a payment of fine within a period of six months from today. 8. A Junior Engineer of MCD would every month issue a certificate under his signature to the effect that there is no unauthorized ongoing construction and/or encroachment on public/government land. The said certificate must also give details regarding any unauthorized ongoing construction and or encroachment on public/government land and action if any proposed to be taken. 8. A Junior Engineer of MCD would every month issue a certificate under his signature to the effect that there is no unauthorized ongoing construction and/or encroachment on public/government land. The said certificate must also give details regarding any unauthorized ongoing construction and or encroachment on public/government land and action if any proposed to be taken. Copies of this certificate and action taken plan would be furnished to the concerned Deputy Commissioner with a copy to the Head Quarters who would maintain records of such certificates. 9. MCD will also prepare a Scheme within a period of four months from today to protect and utilize the public land retrieved from the encroachers in the last two years. 10. MCD to maintain a Building Plan Register and to maintain a Construction Watch Register (CWR) regularly. .11. The whole system of booking of unauthorized construction should be computerized and made on-line and the following procedures will be followed: - i. As soon as the municipal staff detects any unauthorized construction or comes to the notice of the MCD through any other source, the required details will be posted on a formatted sheet fed in the computer. ii. The computer would generate a Performa of all the mandatory actions required under the Act. iii. Once any complaint is registered in the system, the system would forward the same to all concerned officers for taking action as per provisions of the Act. iv. The status of the case would be available for monitoring purpose to senior officers and would also be put on the website of the MCD. v. Once the unauthorized construction is detected and registered, action would be taken against the unauthorized .construction within a time bound manner. vi. Any complaint received and registered would be acted upon within four weeks so as to ensure that no grievance goes unheard and the status of the action taken would from time to time be updated on the website of the MCD. 12. MCD should create a Centralized and Zone wise complaint cell with telephone facility (on the line of Tel. No.100 of the Police Control Room). On receipt of complaint in the centralized complaint center, it should be immediately referred to the concerned MCD zone/office within 24 hours and action taken within one week thereafter. 13. 12. MCD should create a Centralized and Zone wise complaint cell with telephone facility (on the line of Tel. No.100 of the Police Control Room). On receipt of complaint in the centralized complaint center, it should be immediately referred to the concerned MCD zone/office within 24 hours and action taken within one week thereafter. 13. All the maps i.e. to say the Master Plan of Delhi, the Zonal Plans of Delhi, Sub Zonal Plans, Layout Plans of every colony clearly indicating the ownership of the land i.e. Government, Institutional or private as well as land under acquisition, should be put on the MCD, DDA and Delhi government Websites. The information available on the website will be available to all concerned to know the actual ownership of the land before purchasing the same and it will enable the Public spirited persons to assist the authorities in preventing the encroachment of the public land. 17. It would be appropriate to try out the above-mentioned Scheme for a period of about 6 months to see whether or not the menace of illegal constructions and other building law infractions continue or whether they would now be redressed in accordance with law and the suggested and modified scheme. This is only a temporary measure and the working and results thereof will be observed and verified by the Court after the trial period is over. This Court may amend or modify the Scheme as and when the need arises. 18. MCD is directed to furnish its response within three weeks to the suggestion given by Mr. R.K. Khanna, with regard to simplification of the sanction of the building plan and the issuance of a completion certificate by authorizing an accredited architect to do the needful. On this issue, the matter will be listed on 24th October, 2008. 19. We must also notice the sustained efforts put in by the Court Commissioners and the Monitoring Committee whose efforts undoubtedly have resulted in a large number of infractions being redressed. We record our appreciation of the work done by the Monitoring Committee comprising of Mr. B. L. Vohra and Mr. R.S. Gupta and the Court Commissioners comprising of Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna, Mr. Pushkar Sood, Mr. Ashok Arora, Mr. Kirti Uppal, Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, Mr. Arvind K. Gupta, Mr. Sanjeev Ralli, Mr. Sanjay Bansal and Mr. We record our appreciation of the work done by the Monitoring Committee comprising of Mr. B. L. Vohra and Mr. R.S. Gupta and the Court Commissioners comprising of Mr. Rakesh K. Khanna, Mr. Pushkar Sood, Mr. Ashok Arora, Mr. Kirti Uppal, Mr. Sanjeev Bhandari, Mr. Arvind K. Gupta, Mr. Sanjeev Ralli, Mr. Sanjay Bansal and Mr. Akshay Bipin, Advocates, upto now and while we put in force the Scheme proposed by the MCD with appropriate modifications for a period of about six months from 15th September, 2008 in place of the Court Commissioners and the Monitoring Committee, the appointment of future Court Commissioners or other remedial measures cannot be ruled out in case an imminent need for the same arises. Indeed, it is not the plea of the MCD that the Court Commissioners could not have been appointed by this Court. The issues of law raised by Shri Prasad would merit consideration in case the alternate scheme does not satisfactorily work out. 20. We direct the MCD to fully implement the modified Scheme approved by this Court as per paragraph 16 by 15th December, 2008. 21. List on 18th December, 2008 for reporting compliance and progress of the Scheme.