IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Satish Chandra Sharma, Sanjeev Narula, JJ.
Dargha Najeebuddin Firdousi - Appellant
Versus
Delhi Devlopment Authority & Anr. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 840 of 2023 With W.P.(C) 17480 of 2022, W.P.(C) 378 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1770 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1779-1780 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1845 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1858 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1861-1862 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1869-1871 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1880 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1882 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1894 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1947- 1948 of 2023, W.P.(C) 1953 of 2023, W.P.(C) 2001 of 2023, W.P.(C) 2017 of 2023, W.P.(C) 2536 of 2023 and W.P.(C) 5359 of 2023.
Decided On : 08-11-2023
Demolition Notice - Land Dispute - Delhi Development Authority Act, 1957, Section 30 - The judgment primarily addresses the challenge to the demolition notice issued by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) targeting unauthorized occupations in the vicinity of Village Ladha Sarai. The court refrains from adjudicating on the disputes rooted in the factual determinations and outcomes embodied in the demarcation report, and instead grants the petitioners the right to present their case before the competent authority or courts of jurisdiction. The court upholds the petitioners' objection regarding the lack of a fair hearing before the demolition action and quashes the demolition notice, directing the DDA to ensure a fair and reasonable opportunity to be heard before any further demolition action is initiated.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenge the demolition process initiated by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) targeting unauthorized occupations in the vicinity of Village Ladha Sarai, asserting their ownership over properties in khasra No. 1151/3 of Village Mehrauli, New Delhi. The petitioners contend that their properties fall within the bounds of khasra No. 1151/3 and should not be subject to the demolition notice. The DDA maintains that the properties infringe upon Government or forest land under its protection and conservation mandate.
Finding of the Court:
The court refrains from adjudicating on the disputes rooted in the factual determinations and outcomes embodied in the demarcation report and grants the petitioners the right to present their case before the competent authority or courts of jurisdiction. The court upholds the petitioners' objection regarding the lack of a fair hearing before the demolition action and quashes the demolition notice, directing the DDA to ensure a fair and reasonable opportunity to be heard before any further demolition action is initiated.
Issues: The primary issues include the legality of the demolition notice, the authenticity of the demarcation report, and the lack of a fair hearing before the demolition action.
Ratio Decidendi: The court refrains from adjudicating on factual disputes and technical assessments related to demarcation, emphasizing that such matters fall within the expertise and jurisdiction of statutory authorities. The court upholds the petitioners' objection regarding the lack of a fair hearing before the demolition action, emphasizing the obligation of the DDA to ensure procedural fairness to those affected by its actions.
Final Decision: The court quashes the demolition notice and directs the DDA to ensure a fair and reasonable opportunity to be heard before any further demolition action is initiated. The petitions are disposed of, and the court leaves all rights and contentions of parties regarding the demarcation report open.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Narula, J. - Asserting their claim of ownership over properties purportedly falling in khasra No. 1151/3 of Village Mehrauli, New Delhi, the Petitioners have raised a challenge to the demolition process of removing encroachments upon the Mehrauli Archaeological Park, New Delhi ["Park"], being undertaken by Delhi Development Authority ["DDA"] to protect and preserve the Park's heritage. The Petitioners' primary grievance is that DDA's demolition order targets unauthorized occupations specifically in the vicinity of Village Ladha Sarai, rather than Village Mehrauli. Consequently, they argue that such orders should not extend to, nor affect, their properties.
2. During the course of proceedings, it came to the Court's attention that there are several petitions pending on the subject matter at hand before the Bench of Single Judge of this Court. Additionally, this Bench is concurrently considering a Public Interest Litigation ["PIL"], W.P.(C) 4302/2015 that has significant relevance to the ongoing demolition operations conducted by the DDA. Thus, in order to avoid any conflicting directions and also given the commonality and overlap in the issues and contentions urged in all these petitions, we considered it apposite to tag all the matters and render a consolidated judgement. To ensure clarity and with consensus of all parties, this judgment will predominantly address the facts and arguments presented in W.P.(C) 1845/2023.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
3. The facts and proceedings germane for contextual understanding of the present lis, are as follows:
3.1. Driven by their commitment towards conservation of cultural legacy of the Park, in 2015, the Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage, Delhi instituted the afore-noted PIL for restoration of the defaced and encroached monuments situated within the Park, and for formulation of a Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan. In the said proceedings, this Court ordered the DDA to secure the entire area and remove encroachments therefrom., Vide order dated 29th April, 2015. To this effect, the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi ["GNCTD"], through the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, was directed to initiate demarcation process of the Park., On 27th May, 2015. Consequently, demarcation report(s) and site map(s) were prepared, basis whereof unauthorized constructions were identified and DDA proceeded with the demolition process.
3.2. On 12th December, 2022, the DDA notified the impugned demolition order, calling upon the persons occupying the land illegally, to vacate the premises within ten days from the date of said order. In the event of noncompliance, the DDA would then initiate removal/ demolition of the encroached structures. This notice was appended to the walls of inter alia Petitioners' properties, thus requiring them to evacuate the premises or experience the consequences.
3.3. Contending that their properties are situated in Village Mehrauli, and not Village Laddha Sarai, Petitioners submitted several representations to the Deputy Director, DDA. However, the same did not yield a positive response. DDA maintained that the Petitioners' properties lie within the bounds of Government land, and therefore, must be demolished.
3.4. The above-noted stand of the DDA prompted the filing of W.P. (C) 17480/2022 against the demolition order dated 12th December, 2022. In the said petition, on 23rd December, 2022, learned Single Judge of this Court restrained DDA from taking any coercive steps pursuant to the demolition order, in respect of the concerned Petitioners. The remaining Petitioners also resorted to filing of their respective writ petitions, wherein similar orders instructing DDA to maintain status quo were issued by learned Single Judge.
3.5. Later, in view of the fact that the impugned demolition order was premised on the demarcation report dated 21st December, 2021 prepared consequent to the PIL, the DDA preferred an application [C.M. APPL. 24888/2023] in W.P.
AI
The court emphasizes the obligation of the DDA to ensure procedural fairness to those affected by its actions, upholding the petitioners' objection regarding the lack of a fair hearing before the dem....
Point of Law : Grant of temporary injunction - Demarcation report - Demarcation report included determination of location of suit premises. A modern method of TSM has been used to demarcate land. Cla....
The judiciary's jurisdiction under Article 227 is limited to ensuring the authority of subordinate courts, not correcting factual errors.
1. Authorities under the Delhi Land Reforms Act or Delhi Land Revenue Act do not have jurisdiction to order any demarcation in respect of urbanized land.
2. A person who plays a fraud on the court....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for expeditious decision-making by the Revenue Authorities on pending demarcation applications, the rights of the government to take posse....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.