IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dharmesh Sharma, J.
Purnima Singh - Petitioner
Versus
Delhi Developoment Authority & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 2389/2013 & CM APPL. 55895/2023
Decided On : 22-11-2024
(A) Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 21 - Delhi Development Act, 1957 - Allotment of land for Gurudwara - Petitioner challenged the allotment of park land to respondent for construction of Gurudwara, claiming violation of rights under Article 21 and the Act - Court found no evidence that the land was designated as a green area, thus upholding the allotment. (Paras 2, 18, 24)
(B) Jurisdiction of DDA - The DDA has the authority to modify layout plans without following the procedure under Section 11A of the Act, provided modifications conform to the Master Plan and Zonal Development Plan. (Paras 17, 28)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a resident of Sheikh Sarai, challenged the allotment of Tikona Park land for a Gurudwara, alleging violation of her rights and improper allotment process.
Findings of Court:
The court found no merit in the petition, stating the land was never designated as a green area and the allotment was lawful under the DDA's authority.
Issues: The main issue was whether the land in question was designated as a green area and if the DDA's actions were lawful.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the DDA's allotment was justified as there was no evidence of the land being a green area, and the modification of layout plans was within the DDA's jurisdiction.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Dharmesh Sharma, J.
1. The petitioner is invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950, on being aggrieved by the allotment of a portion of the land earmarked for having a park to the respondent No. 4, upon which a Gurudwara has been constructed, and thereby seeking the following reliefs:-
(b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other Writ of similar nature directing the Respondents No.l to 3 to set aside the allotment of the park in favour of the Respondent No.4 and restore the park to its original position and condition after removing all encroachments / recent constructions in the Tikona Park, Sheikh Sarai-I, New Delhi;
(c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other Writ of similar nature directing the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to maintain the said park properly;”
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the petitioner is a resident of Sheikh Sarai, Phase-I, New Delhi, and claims that she has been residing there for the last 33 years and in the neighbourhood, there is a public park known as ‘Tikona Park’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the park’). She came to know that the substantial portion of the park had been illegally and arbitrarily allotted to the respondent No. 4 for the purposes of construction of a Gurudwara in complete violation and breach of the petitioner’s right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950, and provisions of the Delhi Development Act, 1957[The Act].
3. It is submitted that the petitioner made several representations to the respondents, expressing her grievances regarding the allotment of a portion of the designated park and requesting its revocation, but to no avail. Furthermore, the petitioner was not provided with accurate information, despite filing an application under the RTI Act[Right to Information Act, 2005].
4. On taking cognizance of the present writ petition, notice was ordered to be issued to the respondents. The respondent No. 1 filed a short affidavit to the effect that the land in question, admeasuring 3214.55 sqm, vested with the MoR[Ministry of Rehabilitation]. Out of this, a religious site admeasuring 428.5 sqm was carved out, and the remaining land, admeasuring 2786 sqm, is where the playfield/park has been set up, though it is not part of the green belt. It is brought out that on 26.11.2009, a physical survey was conducted, showing the area as undeveloped, with a small boundary wall and fencing. A request for the construction of a Gurudwara was received and forwarded to the then Minister of State for Home Affairs. The proposal for changing the layout plan was placed before the Screening Committee at its meeting chaired by the Vice Chairman of DDA[Delhi Development Authority], approved the proposal for modification of the layout plan on 25.02.2010. Therefore, the allotment of space for religious purposes, specifically for the construction of a Gurudwara, is justified. Lastly, it was highlighted that the religious site does not involve any amendment to the Master Plan[MP] or the Zonal Development Plan[ZDP ].
5. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 4, stating that respondent No. 4/Society was registered on 24.02.2006 under the Societies Registration Act, XXI of 1860, denying the petitioner’s claim that the land in question was allotted for the construction of a Gurudwara Sahib without following due process of law or by destroying a green area. It is further stated that about six hundred Sikh/Punjabi families reside in the vicinity of Savitri Nagar, Sheikh Sarai-1, and the neighbouring colonies, and there was no Gurudwara in Sheikh Sarai, Phase-I, New Delhi. Therefore, the society filed application No. F-23 dated 21.04.2006 for the allotment of land for religious purposes, specifically for the construction of a Gurudwara, with
Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan v. State of Mahrasthra
Bangalore Medical Trust v. B.S. Muddappa (1991) 4 SCC 54
Dr. G. N. Khajuria v. Delhi Development Authority
EB Pocket Residents Welfare Association v. DDA 2003 (68) DRJ 611
Shanti Devi Gupta v. Delhi Development Authority (1994) 54 DLT 620
Union of India v. State of Gujarat (2011) 14 SCC 62
Vasant Kunj Resident Welfare Association (Regd.) v. Lt. Governor of Delhi 2003 (1) AD (Delhi) 727
The court upheld the DDA's authority to allot land for a Gurudwara, finding no evidence that the land was designated as a green area, thus dismissing the writ petition.
The court affirmed that MCD's land use changes from park to school are valid as they conform to approved zoning and demonstrate the necessity for school playground facilities.
Dela laches - Development plan - Bidders who have made payments should not be made to suffer on account of the belated approach of the petitioner in writ petition
The court affirmed that layout plans must adhere to statutory requirements; DDA's compliance was deemed sufficient and valid despite claims of delayed action regarding community facilities.
Modification of land reserved for public purposes requires valid legal processes, including notification and consultation with affected parties, as determined by relevant sections of the Town Plannin....
The judgment establishes the principle that reserved open spaces in layouts cannot be used for any other purpose, emphasizing the public trust doctrine, the importance of preserving open spaces, and ....
Easementary rights against the State require 30 years of uninterrupted use; 20 years of claimed use by the plaintiffs was insufficient to establish such rights.
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.