Statutory authorities must act within the law and confine activities within the statutory provisions.

( 1 ) THIS WRIT PETITION WHICH IS IN THE NATURE OF PUBLIC INTEREST litigation RAISES A QUESTION OF FAR REACHING CONSEQUENCES AND HAS WIDE RAMIFICATIONS. THE DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WHICH IS A CREATURE OF DELHI DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1957 ACQUIRED THE LAND IN QUESTION WHICH WAS AGRICULTURAL LAND BEING IN J-ZONE allegedly FOR DEVELOPMENT. IT STANDS ADMITTED THAT NO APPROVAL OF THE CENTRAL government FOR USE OF THE LAND IN TERMS OF SECTION 11a OF THE SAID ACT HAS BEEN obtained.

( 2 ) ADMITTEDLY SINCE THE DATE OF ACQUISITION TILL 1999 THE FIRST RESPONDENT HEREIN did NOT TAKE ANY STEP TO MOVE the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT FOR TAKING ANY ACTION IN TERMS of SECTION 11a OF THE ACT. FOR THREE YEARS THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ALSO DID NOT TAKE any STEPS PURSUANT TO OR IN FURTHERANCE OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE FIRST respondent HEREIN FOR CHANGE IN THE LAND USER. IN THE MEANTIME, PURPORTED TO BE ON the GROUND OF PROTECTING THE LANDIN QUESTION FROM FURTHER ENCROACHMENT AS ALSO FOR other CO-LATERAL PURPOSES A MASS HOUSING PROJECT IN VASANT KUNJ FOR 416 HIG FOR group I HAD BEEN UNDERTAKEN. PURSUANT TO OR IN FURTHERANCE OF THE SAID SCHEME, A notice INVITING TENDERS HAD BEEN ISSUED AND ALLEGEDLY A CONTRACT HAS BEEN AWARDED for COMPLETION OF THE SAID SCHEME. IN THIS PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION APART FROM highlighting THE VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE DELHI DEVELOPMENT ACT AND THE rules FRAMED THEREUNDER THE PETITIONER HEREIN HAD CONTENDED THAT THE WATER LEVEL of THE AREA HAS GONE DOWN TO A GREAT EXTENT AND AS A MATTER OF FACT THE WATER requirement OF THE AREA IS OF THE ORDER OF 4 MGD AND ONLY 1. 3 MGD HAS BEEN supplied BY WAY OF RIVER WATER AND THE REST IS SOURCED FROM THE ALREADY STRESSED ground WATER REGIME. PERMISSION TO DIG CERTAIN BORE-WELLS WERE GRANTED BY THE central GROUND WATER AUTHORITY IN TERMS OF SECTION (3) OF THE ENVIRONMENT protection ACT, 1986 BUT IT ALSO PROHIBITED EXTRACTION OF THE GROUND WATER WITHOUT its SPECIFIC PRIOR APPROVAL BY A NOTIFICATION DATED 25. 4. 1999. THE FIRST RESPONDENT despite THE SAID BAN HAS BEEN ALLEGEDLY DIGGING GROUND WATER IN VIOLATION OF THE SAID ban. THE FIRST RESPONDENT, HOWEVER, IN ITS REPLY ALLEGED THAT IT HAS STARTED SPECIAL projects FOR SUPPLY OF WATER IN THE AREA IN QUESTION AND WHEREAS THE CONSTRUCTIONS of THE FLATS MAY BE COMPLETED BY 2004 SUCH WATER SUPPLY SCHEME WOULD BE completed BY DECEMBER, 2003. IT NOW STANDS ADMITTED THAT THE CONSTRUCTIONS HAVE been STARTED IN CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF DELHI DEVELOPMENT ACT AND THE rules FRAMED THEREUNDER. WHEN WE HEARD THE MATTER IN PART ON 11 TH SEPTEMBER, 2002 it WAS PRAYED BY MR. ARUN JAITELY, LEARNED SENIOR ADVOCATE APPEARING ON BEHALF OF respondent NO. 1 THAT RESPONDENT NO. 2 HEREIN BE ASKED TO INFORM THIS COURT ABOUT the PROGRESS MADE ON THE REQUEST OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT FOR CHANGE OF THE LAND RULES.

( 3 ) TODAY MS. RAMAN OBEROI HAS PRODUCED BEFORE US A PURPORTED FAX MESSAGE which IS AS UNDER: "delhi DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SUBMITTED A PROPOSAL WITH APPROVAL OF competent AUTHORITY ON 17th NOVEMBER, 1999 TO MINISTRY OF URBAN development FOR CHANGE OF LAND USE OF AN AREA MEASURING ABOUT 56 HAC. (138. 40 ACRES) IN THE SOUTH OF MEHRAULI-MAHIPALPUR ROAD, NEW DELHI. 3. ON 14. 7. 2000 DDA AGAIN REQUESTED MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR central GOVERNMENT APPROVAL FOR ISSUE OF A PUBLIC NOTICE UNDER SECTION 11-A OF DD ACT, 1957 FOR INVITING OBJECTIONS/suggestions FROM THE PUBLIC FOR THE proposed CHANGE OF LAND USE. 4. ON 25. 8. 2000 MINISTRY SOUGHT CLARIFICATION FORM DDA AS TO WHETHER clearance FOR SUCH CHANGE OF LAND USE HAS BEEN OBTAINED FORM NATIONAL CAPITAL region PLANNING BOARD. 5. ON 16. 1. 2001 DDA WROTE TO CHIEF REGIONAL PLANNER OF NATIONAL CAPITAL region PLANNING BOARD FOR NECESSARY CLEARANCE FOR PROPOSED CHANGE OF LAND use. 6. NCRPBWROTETODDAONL7. 8. 2001 THATPROPOSALISBEINGEXAMINEDBY THEM and WILL BE PLACED BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMITTEE SOON FOR CONSIDERATION. 7. VICE-CHAIRMAN,ddarequestedministryofurbandevelopmenton