The court emphasized the strict compliance with the Apex Court's directions against unauthorized religious constructions on public land, rejecting justifications based on local orders or committee approvals.

JUDGMENT

Rekha Palli, J. - The petitioners have approached this Court inter alia seeking a direction to the respondent no.1 for removal of an unauthorized construction just outside their house/property bearing No. B-72, Defence Colony, New Delhi. The petitioners submit that the structure in question is a raised platform around a tree, which platform is painted orange and some idols and photographs of Hindu Gods and Goddesses have been placed thereon, photographs of which have been annexed as Annexure P-1 to the present petition.

2. The grievance of the petitioners is that the aforesaid illegal construction not only amounts to encroachment but is also causing nuisance by allowing congregation of various elements indulging in unlawful activities behind the said structure, which according to the petitioners poses security hazards not only to them but also to the public at large. It is the petitioners case that the respondent no. 1 has been negligent in discharging its duties and despite various representations made by them, the said respondent has failed to free the public land from the said encroachment.

3. On the last date, keeping in view the petitioners plea that the encroachment was not even a religious structure where any prayers were being offered, this Court had directed the SHO of the area to file a report regarding the number of visitors, to the site in question with details of offerings, if any being made by them to the idols on the site.

It was also directed that the report would be prepared on the basis of a vigil to be kept on the site by police personnel for atleast 24 hours.

The said report has been filed and the relevant extract of the same reads as under:

"1) That in compliance with the order of this Honble Court dated 7th December 2021, I had deputed two constables to maintain vigil on the subject "Chabutara" constructed around a tree on the Bhishma Pitahmah Marg, New Delhi. The constables were deployed for a period of 24 hours from 8 AM on 8th December 2021 till 8 AM on 9th December 2021.

2) That I say the Chabutra contains some idols and pictures of Hindu Gods. During this period neither Pooja/Aarti was performed, nor anyone stopped to worship the idols. There is no priest on the subject site and no one offered any offerings to those idols. However, some passer-by did fold hands before the idols."

4. By placing reliance on the orders passed by the Apex Court in SLP No. 8519/2006 on 29.09.2009, 07.12.2009 and 31.01.2018, Mr. P.V Kapur, learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the Apex Court as way back as on 29.09.2009 directed that no unauthorized construction shall be permitted to be carried out in the name of a Temple, Church, Mosque or Gurudwara etc. on public streets, public parks or other public places. The relevant extract of the said order reads as under -

"No unauthorized construction shall be carried out or permitted in the name of Temple, Church, Mosque or Gurudwara etc. on public streets, public parks or other public places etc. In respect of the unauthorized construction of religious nature which has already taken place, the State Governments and the Union Territories shall review the same on case-to-case basis and take appropriate steps as expeditiously as possible" In respect of the unauthorized construction of religious nature which has already taken place, the State Governments and the Union Territories shall review the same on case to case basis and take appropriate steps as expeditiously as possible"

5. He therefore contends that keeping in view the aforesaid directions issued by the Supreme Court, the respondents had themselves informed this Court on the very first date of hearing, i.e., 29.09.2021 that they are conscious of their duties to remove all unauthorized constructions and had therefore assured this Court that they will take immediate steps to demolish the aforesaid unauthorized construction. However, the respondents have not only failed to carry out the demolition but have n