After the government introduced a law to provide relief to the trading bodies, the court declared it invalid in response to another public interest litigation.
Several traders' unions have argued that the action may have serious economic, social and psychological impact, and accused the government of not providing adequate alternate space required for shops and offices.
In a newspaper rebuttal, Justice Sabharwal addressed some other allegations, but failed to explain why he did not recuse himself from a case where his own sons may be said to have a direct interest.
[5] Vitusha Oberoi, an editor at Mid-day, said: "We have said that what we have said is the truth (in their articles relating to former Chief Justice of India Y K Sabharwal) and that is why we should not be hauled up for contempt.
Some of the major events were as follows:[7] On 16 February 2006, the Delhi High Court sent a notice to the MCD to remove all the commercial ventures in residential areas in the city.
[9] On 29 March, under tight security, MCD started sealing the commercial establishments whose owners had failed to file affidavits before the deadline set by the court.
On 25 April, the union urban development minister, Jaipal Reddy, said that the central government would provide a bill concerning regularisation of commercial establishments.
MCD announced the end of the sealing drive on 20 May after the central government introduced a bill to suspend the action of municipal authorities.
In response to a petition moved jointly by the Delhi Residents Welfare Associations Front and an NGO Citizens Forum, which alleged that the new legislation was politically motivated in advance of the coming municipal elections, and was illegal, the SC issued notices to the centre and the MCD on 23 May.
The court also clarified that it would not tolerate the government's continued attempts to pass new laws that dilute its orders to remove shops in residential areas.
On 18 October the Supreme Court further extended, till 31 January 2007, the last date for filing of affidavits by traders in the capital who were using residential premises for commercial activities for those who had not done so and thus in a way temporarily postponed the sealing of their shops.
On 25 October the Delhi Traders Association decided to intensify its protests against the sealing drive, which was scheduled to restart from 1 November.
On 3 November, the MCD approached the SC with a fresh petition asking for an indefinite postponement of sealing, citing the law and order situation.
[10] On 18 December the showrooms of several top designers were sealed in the Ambawata complex mall near Qutub Minar in South Delhi.
)[12] On 31 January thousands of traders filed affidavits that they would abide by the court's verdict as demanded by the SC even as the government claimed that the soon to be notified Delhi Master Plan would finish off the drive.
[15] On 9 February an NGO, The Delhi Pradesh Citizen Council, challenged the Masterplan in the Supreme Court saying that it is a move only to appease the traders ahead of incoming municipal elections.
[16] On 13 February the Supreme Court stayed the sealing of commercial establishments in residential areas on 2,183 roads covered by the Master Plan Delhi-2021 until the issuing of further orders.