SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Del) 570

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
Jayanti Devi - Petitioner
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Others – Respondents
W.P.(C) No. 1654 Of 2023, CM Appl. No. 8230 Of 2023, 8231 Of 2023 And W.P.(C) No. 1860 Of 2023 and CM Appl. No.7126 Of 2023
Decided On : 02-05-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Avinash Adv.
Mr. Rishikesh Kumar ASC GNCTD with Mr. Aditya Raj, Mr. Sudhir Kumar Shukla, Mr. Sumit Choudhary, Mr. Sudhir, Mr. Muhammad Zaid, Miss Sheenu Priya Adv. for R/GNCTD.
Mr. Parvinder Chauhan, Adv. for DUSIB.
Mr. Paul Kumar Kalai and Mr. Kaoliangpou Kamei, Adv.
Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar CGSC with Mr. Srish Kumar Mishra Mr. Sagar Mehlawat and Mr. Alexander Mathai Paikaday, Adv.

The main legal point established is that unless a jhuggi is part of the recognized cluster of the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board, no rehabilitation can be directed.

Headnote:

Eviction - Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015 - [WP(C) 1654/2023, WP(C) 1860/2023] - Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015 (Policy) - The court discussed the provisions of the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015 and emphasized the requirement for jhuggi clusters to be duly notified for stay on demolition to be feasible. The court also highlighted the need for rehabilitation policy to protect the right to shelter for those facing eviction, and the responsibility of the authorities to provide alternative accommodation before demolition.

Fact of the Case:

The Petitioners challenged eviction notices issued by the Public Works Department, seeking stay of demolition and rehabilitation under the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015. The court considered the status of the jhuggi clusters and the entitlement to rehabilitation.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Petitioners' jhuggis were not part of the recognized Basti and therefore not entitled to rehabilitation under the Policy. However, the court directed the authorities to provide alternative accommodation in a shelter home before demolition.

Issues: Clarity on the status of the jhuggi clusters, entitlement to rehabilitation, and the responsibility of the authorities before demolition.

Ratio Decidendi: The main legal point established is that unless a jhuggi is part of the recognized cluster of the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board, no rehabilitation can be directed. The court emphasized the need for alternative accommodation before demolition and the protection of the right to shelter for those facing eviction.

Final Decision: The Petitioners were given one month's time to move to the shelter home for temporary shelter before demolition. The petitions were disposed of accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

(Prathiba M. Singh, J.) :—

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. In WP(C) 1654/2023, the Petitioner-Jayanti Devi is a resident of a jhuggi at Bhairon Marg in front of Gate No. 1, Pragati Maidan, New Delhi. She has filed the present writ petition challenging the impugned eviction notice bearing no. S 23 (ROAD)/S.B.A. MANDAL M-321/166 dated 28th January, 2023 issued by the Public Works Department (hereinafter ‘PWD’) which reads as under:

    “All you slum dwellers Bhairo Marg, Opposite Gate No. 1, Pragati Maidan are informed to voluntarily demolish your slum within 15 days of information phase, otherwise, your slum will be removed with the help of police and Will be sent to the shelter home (Dwarka, Geeta Colony) identified by the Delhi Urban Improvement Shelter Board (DUSIB), in which the maximum period of stay will be 03 months.”

3. The case of the Petitioner is that she has been living in this jhuggi since 2012 and also has gas and electricity connections for the said premises. Even the voter ID card of the Petitioner is stated to have been issued to the Petitioner with the address of the said jhuggi.

4. Further it is the case of the Petitioner that, in terms of the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015 (hereinafter ‘Policy’) dated 14th June, 2016, the Petitioner's jhuggi having come up before 1st January, 2015, the Petitioner is entitled to rehabilitation and the Petitioner ought not to be removed from the present place of occupation, that too without notice and hearing.

5. It is the case of the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (hereinafter ‘DUSIB’) that the Petitioner's jhuggi cluster does not belong to notified clusters, which are 675 and 82 in number. Reliance was placed upon the order passed by this court in W.P.(C) 1386/2023 titled ‘Kash Ram v. Public Works Department, GNCTD’ where the court had directed the demolition of jhuggis in the Dhaula Kuan area, subject to certain conditions.

6. The petition W.P(C) 1654/2023 was listed on 10th February, 2023 on which date, after hearing the parties, the following order was passed. The operative portion of the said order is set out below.

    “7. Heard. It is now the settled position in law that until and unless the jhuggi clusters are duly notified, stay on demolition would not be feasible.

8. This position of law has recently been reiterated by this Court in Shakarpur Slum Union v. DDA, [W.P.(C) 6779/2021, decision dated 2nd August, 2022,] wherein the Court held as under:

“37. This Court while dealing with Ajay Maken (supra) and Sudama Singh (supra) never gave any licence to any person to encroach upon Government property. However, this Court is dealing with a human problem and right to shelter has been described as right which has to be protected by Courts especially for those who will have no place to go with their family and belongings if they are faced with mid-night demolitions. In order to ameliorate the human problem, this Court in Sudama Singh (supra) had directed that the State Government must formulate a comprehensive protocol to ensure that persons who have encroached upon Government lands are not rendered shelter-less and, therefore, a rehabilitation policy has to be brought out to rehabilitate those persons. It was in pursuance of that judgment that DUSIB was made the nodal agency for rehabilitation of the persons living in JJ clusters. Parameters were laid down as to who would be entitled to the benefit of the DUSIB Policy. The judgment of this Court in Ajay Maken (supra) cannot be interpreted to mean clusters not identified by the DUSIB would be entitled to rehabilitation.

XXX

42. Resultantly, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the DDA to carry out further demolition only in consultation with the DUSIB. The DDA is further directed to give sufficient time to the dwellers to make alternate arrangements or, alternatively, steps should be taken to accommodate the dwellers in the shelters provided by the DUSIB

            Click Here to Read the rest of this document
            1
            2
            3
            4
            5
            6
            7
            8
            9
            10
            11
            SupremeToday Portrait Ad
            supreme today icon
            logo-black

            An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

            Please visit our Training & Support
            Center or Contact Us for assistance

            qr

            Scan Me!

            India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

            For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

            whatsapp-icon Back to top