Back
2020 Supreme(Del) 715
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M Singh, J.
Shakina - Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority - Respondent
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3390 of 2020; Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 12032 of 2020, 12033 of 2020
Decided On : 16-07-2020
Arun Birbal, Advocate, Pawan Bindra, Advocate, Sanjee Kumar, Advocate, Sumant De, Advocate
The STF's considered view and the petitioner's entitlement to relief were central to the judgment.
Headnote:
Property Dispute - Delhi Development Authority - DD Act, 1957, MC Mehta v. Union of India, W.P (C) No.4677/1985 - The court analyzed the compliance of the order dated 23rd April, 2019 and the entitlement of the petitioner to relief. The STF had taken a considered view in the matter and the petitioner was not entitled to any relief.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition against the Delhi Development Authority seeking to restrain it from taking coercive steps and to grant a right of hearing before the Special Task Force. The petitioner claimed ownership of a property inherited from her father, which was subject to a previous court order and alleged coercive action by the DDA.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the STF had taken a considered view in the matter and the petitioner was not entitled to any relief. The petitioner had failed to establish rights in the property and had availed various remedies without success.
Issues: Compliance with the court order dated 23rd April, 2019 and the entitlement of the petitioner to relief.
Ratio Decidendi: The STF had taken a considered view in the matter, and the petitioner was not entitled to any relief as she had failed to establish rights in the property and had availed various remedies without success.
Final Decision: The prayers in the writ petition were rejected, and the court ordered that the petitioner be given two weeks' notice before any demolition or removal of encroachments, and that the demolition should be respectful of the graves on the property.
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. - The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition against the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter, "DDA") seeking an order restraining DDA from taking any coercive steps, as also a right of hearing before the Special Task Force (hereinafter, "STF").
Petitioner''s Case
2. The case of the Petitioner is that she is an original resident and owner of property bearing No. T-2, Village Begumpur, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi110017, forming part of Khasra No.110 (Old Khasra No.222/60) (hereinafter, "property"). She states that the property was inherited by her from her father. The entire basis of the writ is an order dated 23rd April, 2019 passed by a ld. Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.4649/2017. The said writ petition was filed by one Mr. Fazruddin, who is alleged to be a neighbour of the Petitioner, against the DDA. The Petitioner was Respondent No.3 in the said writ petition in which notice was issued on 4th December, 2018 and the DDA was directed to keep any coercive action in abeyance till the next date. As per order dated 23rd April, 2019, the ld. Division Bench, while finally disposing off the said writ, had directed the STF to take a considered view in the matter. Interim order dated th December, 2018 was continued till the time the STF took a decision as to the status of the property.
3. However, despite this order of the ld. Division Bench, the Petitioner''s case is that she was made aware of a Whatsapp message, circulated on 1st June, 2020, as per which the DDA was taking action to demolish the property. Hence, the reliefs sought in the writ petition are as under:
"a) Pass such orders/direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby directing and the restraining the Respondent not to take any coercive step till the order dated 23.04.2019 is compiled in its true letter and spirit; and
b) Pass such and further order thereby granting the Petitioner the right to be heard by the STF as and when the issue of status of the property in question i.e. T-2, village Beguam Pur (Khasra No.110), New Delhi; and
c) Pass such and further orders thereby directing the Respondent to follow the Order dated 04.12.2018 & 23.04.2019 in its true letter and spirit; and
d) pass such other or further order or orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper."
Procedural History
4. This writ petition was first heard on 8th June, 2020, on which date demolition by the DDA had already begun. In view of the fact that ld. counsel for the DDA was to seek instructions in the matter, the demolition was stayed until the next date.
5. On 9th June, 2020, the DDA placed on record various documents to argue that the property was located in Khasra No.110 and the said land was acquired by the DDA way back in the 1970s, which acquisition was upheld by this Court. It was also argued that the Petitioner was merely an encroacher and, accordingly, dismissal of the writ was prayed of. Copies of the documents filed by the DDA were supplied to the Petitioner. Detailed oral submissions have been made by the parties. A series of written submissions with several documents attached therewith, have also been exchanged and placed for the Court''s consideration.
6. On 11th June, 2020, an application has been filed by one Sh.Jagan S/o Sh. Musaddi Khan seeking impleadment. However, on the said date, the impleadment application was not on record. Submissions were briefly heard and the intervenor was directed to transmit the same to the Court Master through email. On the next date, i.e., 22nd June, 2020, when judgment was reserved, none appeared for the intervenor. In any event the request for impleadment on the ground that the land in question is allegedly the ancestral land of the applicant and his family members cannot be entertained in the present writ petition which is only concerned with one portion of Khasra no.110 i.e., the ''property''. Accordingly, the impleadment application, being CM No ./2020 (to be numbered), is dismissed.
Submissio
