IMPORTANT POINT
The court's decision was based on the interpretation of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 and previous orders, emphasizing the need for the Deputy Conservator of Forest to dispose of the representation within six weeks and ordering no further coercive action to be taken for a period of ten days.

JUDGMENT

Tushar Rao Gedela, J. (Oral)

[The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid mode]

CM APPL. 9908/2024

1. Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 2397/2024 & CM APPL. 9907/2024 (Stay)

3. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, inter alia seeking the following reliefs:

"a. Set aside the Notice of Respondent No. 1 bearing Notice Bearing F. No. 52/DCF(S)/LAND/ASOLA/2022-23/13524-30 dated 30.01.2024 qua the premises of the Petitioner being land and appurtenant buildings at Khasra No. 906(1-19),907(1-15),908 (1-9),909(1-13),911(1-16), 912(2-4), 913(0-14) And 914(0-10),situated at Village Asola, Tehsil Saket, New Delhi and/or

b. Declare the Notice of Respondent No. 1 bearing Notice Bearing F. No. 52/DCF(S)/LAND/ASOLA/2022-23/13524-30 dated 30.01.2024 does not pertain to premises of the Petitioner being land and appurtenant buildings at Khasra No. 906(1-19), 907(1-15),908 (1-9), 909(1-13), 911(1-16), 912(2-4), 913(0-14) And 914(0-10), situated at village, Asola,Tehsil Saket, New Delhi ("said premises") and/or.

c. Direct the Respondents to expeditiously demarcate the Petitioner's premises by scientific measures like TSM (Total Station Machine) or DGPS (Differential Global Positioning System) during the pendency of this Petition."

4. Mr. Sunil Fernandes, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of parcels of land by virtue of the registered Sale Deeds dated 28.01.1994 in respect of land admeasuring 12 Bighas and 4 Biswas bearing Khasra Nos. 906(1-19), 907(1-15), 908(1-9), 909(1-13), 911(1-16), 912(2-4), 913(0-14) and 914(0-10), situated at Village Asola, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi.

5. Learned senior counsel submits that apart from the aforesaid Sale Deeds, the petitioner had also obtained NOC from the erstwhile Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking seeking permission to fix a tube well for the purpose of agricultural use in the subject lands. The same was granted vide the permission dated 21.07.1995. The permission was granted vide order dated 02.01.1997 by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi for construction of farm house on Khasra Nos. 906(1-19), 907(1-15), 908(1-9), 909(1-13), 911(1-16), 912(2-4), 913(0-14) and 914(0-10), total admeasuring 13 Bighas, situated at Village Asola, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi.

6. Learned senior counsel submits that, that apart there are ample revenue documents in the form of Khasra Girdawari, etc. to show the consistent possession of the petitioner over the Khasra numbers enumerated above. While the petitioner was in the possession of the entire Khasra numbers, as enumerated above, without even giving any proper legal notice, respondent no.1-Department of Forest and Wildlife brought their machines and carried out demolition of the parameter boundary wall in the property of the petitioner. According to learned senior counsel they have also inserted certain poles on the land for a purpose which is unknown till date.

7. Learned senior counsel invites attention of this Court to the impugned demolition notice dated 30.01.2024 to submit that the said notice is for some encroachers on Khasra no. 1424 and 1430 of Village Asola, Tehsil Saket, New Delhi and has no reference either to the petitioner or his property and as such the such demolition which has been carried out is not in accordance with law.

8. Moreover, learned senior counsel also submits that there is no demarcation conducted by the respondent before such action was taken. He also submits that the petitioner has never been made a party to such demarcation, if any, carried out by the said respondent.

9. In the aforesaid circumstances, learned senior counsel submits that the entire action taken by the respondent is contrary to the law.

10. Ms. Mehak Nakra, learned ASC appearing for the respondents on advance notice submits that the portions, which according to respondent no.1 fall within the forest land, as per the impugn