1. Mr. Kirti Uppal, learned counsel for the Petitioners at the very outset points out that the correct name of Petitioner No. 1 is ‘C.R. Park (M, N & P Blocks) Residents Welfare Association (Regd.)’ and that the name of Petitioner No.1 as appearing in the memo of parties as well as in the writ petition and other documents should read accordingly. This prayer is allowed and it is directed that as far as the present petition is concerned, the name of Petitioner No.1 should read as ‘C.R.Park (M, N & P Blocks)

WP(c) No.422/2010 Page 1 of 11

Residents Welfare Association (Regd.).’

2. The Petitioner No.1 is an association of the residents of Blocks M, N and P of Chittranjan Park (‘CR Park’), New Delhi. Petitioner No.2 is a welfare association of the residents of CR Park Block 52.

3. The principal grievance of the Petitioners is against the allotment made by a letter dated 12th May 1997 of a piece of land in Plot Nos. 2 and 3 adjoining Pocket 52 and Blocks, M. N & P, C.R. Park, New Delhi in favour of Respondent No.4, a Buddhist Mission called the Buddha Tri Ratna Mission (‘BTRM’). It is contended that the allotment is contrary to the applicable rules and bylaws. It is accordingly prayed that the Respondents to maintain the said land allotted to BTRM as open area as mentioned in the lay out plan.

4. This is not the first time that the said allotment to BTRM has been questioned in this Court by residents of CR Park. Writ Petition (C) No. 1672 of 1997 was filed by some of the residents of CR Park, challenging the said allotment on the ground that the said land was in fact being used as a park and was liable to be maintained as such.

5. In the said writ petition, the Delhi Development Authority (‘DDA’) filed a counter affidavit stating that under the original lay out plan of the area, any three sides measuring 0.25 acres each were earmarked as religious sites. One of the plots already stood allotted. The Plot Nos. 2 and 3 were earmarked as a religious site under the layout plan. A proposal has been received from the Land & Development Office (‘L&DO’) for utilisation of the said plots as religious plots to be allotted to the Buddhist Mission. It was in those circumstances that the Vice Chairman of the DDA has passed an order on 6th October 1995 for handing the site to the L&DO. Therefore, the use of the plots for a religious purpose was in accordance with the layout plan.

6. On its part the L&DO supported the stand of the DDA. They pointed out that “the residents of the area opposed the allotment of the land to the Buddhist Mission on the ground that the majority of the residents surrounding the land are Bengalis and they want to retain this land as a permanent puja park as well as an open park to be used by children as playground. Since the plot was meant for religious activities, it is not possible to create certain pockets/colonies exclusively on caste and religious basis. The land earmarked as religious site is to be allotted to Buddhist Mission.”

7. After noting the above submission, the learned Single Judge of this Court on 23rd October 2003 disposed of the writ petition with the following directions:

“In view of the aforesaid, in my considered view, the only direction liable to be passed against the respondents is that the plots in question should be utilized only in accordance with the layout plan of the area concerned as amended from time to time.

The writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction.”

8. It appears that thereafter one of the Petitioners in the above writ petition, Shri P.K. Paul of CR Park made an application on 17th August 2007 under the Right to Information Act 2005 (‘RTI Act’) to the L&DO seeking information on the allotment of the land in question to Respondent No.4. In response thereto on 27th December 2007 the L&DO wrote to Shri Paul as under:

“Sir,

I am directed to refer to your letter dated 17/8/2007 received through Delhi Division, Ministry of Urban Development on 28/8/2007 on the above