NEW DELHI: The city government on Wednesday faced the wrath of the Delhi High Court which said its recent circular permitting the sale of unauthorisedly constructed buildings "ditched the common man" and favoured builders."This order (circular) is favouring builders and is against the people as the municipal authorities are free to demolish such constructions," a bench of justices Badar Durrez Ahmed and Sanjeev Sachdeva observed after the circular was brought to its attention."We have been saying there are unauthorised constructions in the capital which are built on one brick and any slight tremor would lead to thousands of deaths. Your action is permitting builders to register such unauthorised constructions. What is all this," the bench asked the Delhi government."You are ditching the common man. He has no option. Builders would benefit," it said and sought a status report from city government on why such a step was taken.The circular of April 17 was placed before the bench by advocate Ajay Arora, appearing for South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC), who said it amounted to legitimising unauthorised constructions.After perusing the circular, the court observed that while builders could sell the unauthorised buildings "built on one brick", the person buying it would be on the receiving end as MCD was free to demolish such structures.According to the circular, with regard to transactions of immovable property which are unauthorised, the revenue department should mention whether it was unsafe or illegal or unauthorised during registration. It allows the municipal authorities to take action as per law against such unauthorised construction.The court sought a status report after advocate Raman Duggal, appearing for city government, said the idea behind the move was to earn revenue by registering the sale deeds of such properties.He also said while sale deeds of such properties were being registered, they would also carry an endorsement that it was an unauthorised construction.The court, while seeking the report from the government, asked it to consider an analogy that if someone sells a car after stealing it and registration of the vehicle is allowed with an endorsement, is it not a stolen property.The court was hearing a PIL filed by NGO, Removal of Corruption and Welfare Society, to protect the public at large from being deceived into buying unauthorised buildings or flats.