Timely vacating of premises for re-development is crucial to facilitate the cleaning and re-development of the Mandir premises.

Headnote:
Kalkaji Mandir - Unauthorised occupation/construction - [Order dated 9th December 2021, 25th December 2021] - The court directed the removal of unauthorised occupation/construction in the Mandir premises and the vacation of residences within the Mandir premises. The shopkeepers were given time to remove their articles and belongings, and those residing within the Mandir premises were directed to vacate. The court rejected the request for more time for the shopkeepers, emphasizing the need for timely vacating to facilitate the cleaning and re-development of the Mandir premises.
Fact of the Case:

The case pertains to the Kalkaji Mandir, involving the removal of unauthorised occupation/construction and vacation of residences within the Mandir premises.
Finding of the Court:

The court directed the shopkeepers and residents to vacate the premises by 25th December 2021, rejecting the request for more time and emphasizing the need for timely vacating to facilitate the cleaning and re-development of the Mandir premises.
Issues: Unauthorised occupation/construction, vacation of residences, and timely vacating of the premises.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for timely vacating to facilitate the cleaning and re-development of the Mandir premises.
Final Decision: The shopkeepers and residents were directed to vacate the premises by 25th December 2021, and any delay would result in the concerned authorities taking action in accordance with the law.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. - This hearing has been done in physical Court. Hybrid mode is permitted in cases where permission is being sought from the Court.

2. These matters pertain to the Kalkaji Mandir, which this Court has been hearing from time to time. These are part heard matters.

FAO 36/2021 & CM APPLs. 2914/2021, 10442/2021, 10444/2021, 20904/2021, 23819/2021, 25868/2021, 25869/2021, 25870/2021, 25884/2021, 25885/2021, 26495/2021, 29121/2021, 38063/2021, 38289/2021, 39643/2021, 43944/2021, 43945/2021 & 43946/2021

CM (M) 323/2021 & CM APPLs. 14178/2021, 20945/2021, 20949/2021, 40269/2021

CM (M) 575/2021 & CM APPL. 43796/2021

CONT.CAS(C) 614/2021

3. At the outset, Mr. Neeraj Bhardwaj, ld. Counsel for the Plaintiff in CS(OS) 556/2021, which was disposed of vide order dated 9th December 2021, submits that he seeks a clarification in paragraph 61 of the said order. He submits that the plaintiffs in the said suit are Shri Kalkaji Mandir Prabandhak Sudhar Committee, Mr. Ajay Bhardwaj, Mr. Vijay Bhardwaj, Ms. Rakhi and Ms. Rajni Gaur, however in the said order, it is recorded as Mr. Tarun Gaur. Accordingly, he seeks a clarification/rectification in respect thereof. Paragraph 61 shall stand rectified in terms pleaded. Ordered accordingly.

Removal of unauthorised occupation/construction in the Mandir premises

4. Vide last order dated 9th December 2021, this Court had directed the shopkeepers in the Mandir premises to give undertakings before the ld. Administrator of the Kalkaji Mandir, appointed by this Court. Upon the said undertaking being given, and verification in respect thereof being conducted, the shopkeepers were to be given reasonable time by the ld. Administrator for removal of their articles and belongings from the shops lying sealed. Upon the same being done, the SDMC and DDA, in cooperation with other civic agencies, were to remove all unauthorised constructions/ encroachment by 25th December 2021.

5. Further in respect of those persons residing within the Mandir premises in the Dharamshala or otherwise, this Court had directed the vacation of the said residences on or before 25th December 2021.

6. On a query from the Court as to the status on-ground at the Mandir and developments in respect of the directions given on 9th December 2021 by this Court, Ms. Shambhavi Kala, ld. Counsel appearing for the ld.

Administrator firstly submits that 31 shops had been demolished prior to the last date of hearing. Post the same, the 21 jhuggis in the Mandir premises have been demolished by the DDA. Further, insofar as removal of the shopkeepers along with their articles lying in the sealed shops, it is submitted that a few shopkeepers have voluntarily removed their belongings. However, more shopkeepers are, today onwards, removing their respective goods and belongings from the said shop premises, and are expected to remove all their belongings in the next few days.

7. Mr. Jain, ld. Counsel appearing for 65 shopkeepers, submits that the main entry to the Mandir has been locked, due to which the belongings of the shopkeepers cannot be removed at one go. He further submits that more time ought to be given for the shopkeepers to remove their goods. This request is rejected inasmuch as undertakings have already been given by the shopkeepers and they are also being considered for allotment of alternate space on licence basis. Any delay in vacating the existing shops would further delay the cleaning and re-development of the Mandir premises.

8. Accordingly, the ld. Administrator to take steps to ensure that the shopkeepers do not face any impediments in removing their goods and belongings by 25th December 2021, as already directed by this Court. It is made clear that if the said shopkeepers do not remove their belongings by the 25th of December, the concerned Authorities/ Civic Agencies, would be free to take action post 25th December, 2021, pursuant to the order dated 9th

December 2021, in accordance with law.

9. Ms. Kawal Preet Kaur, ld. Counse