Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Shakina - Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority - Respondent
W.P. (C) 3390 of 2020 & CM Appls. 12032-33 of 2020
Decided On : 16-07-2020
The court affirmed that property acquired by an authority remains under its ownership despite unauthorized claims, emphasizing adherence to Supreme Court directives regarding unauthorized constructions.
Headnote:(A) Delhi Development Act, 1957 - Petitioner sought to restrain the DDA from demolishing property and for a hearing before the Special Task Force (STF) concerning unauthorized construction. The court noted that the petitioner, an alleged encroacher, could not muster legal ownership despite several proceedings challenging DDA actions since 2000. The STFs multiple meetings confirmed compliance with an earlier order, asserting the autonomy of the STF in handling unauthorized constructions under Supreme Court supervision. (Paras 15, 24, 25)
(B) Jurisdiction - The court underscored that due process was followed in permitting the STF's evaluation of property status while ensuring the petitioner was not granted rights that were denied in prior judgments. The petitioner’s requests were deemed unnecessary as the STF had sufficiently dealt with the issue. (Paras 15, 26)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner claimed ownership of property amid ongoing demolition attempts by the DDA, relying on a previous court order while failing to provide necessary legal standings in consistently lost prior suits challenging ownership and encroachment claims.
Findings of Court:
The STF's findings were established through multiple meetings and the history of property acquisition was reasserted, indicating the removal of encroachments. The petitioner was not granted a hearing as per the relevant orders.
Issues: Whether the STF complied with the order of the Division Bench and if the petitioner was entitled to relief.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held the STF functioned within its jurisdiction as per the Supreme Court’s orders, confirming the historical ownership of the DDA over the land in question, thus denying the petitioner’s request for a hearing.
Result: Writ Petition dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks to restrain dda demolition actions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. procedural history of heard demolition matters. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. arguments for and against property ownership and action. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. court's analysis on compliance with previous orders. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. final decision dismissing petitioner's requests. (Para 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition against the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter, "DDA") seeking an order restraining DDA from taking any coercive steps, as also a right of hearing before the Special Task Force (hereinafter, "STF").
Petitioner's Case
2. The case of the Petitioner is that she is an original resident and owner of property bearing No. T-2, Village Begumpur, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi- 110017, forming part of Khasra No.110 (Old Khasra No.222/60) (hereinafter, "property"). She states that the property was inherited by her from her father. The entire basis of the writ is an order dated 23rd April, 2019 passed by a ld. Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) No.4649/2017. The said writ petition was filed by one Mr. Fazruddin, who is alleged to be a neighbour of the Petitioner, against the DDA. The Petitioner was Respondent No.3 in the said writ petition in which notice was issued on 4th December, 2018 and the DDA was directed to keep any coercive action in abeyance till the next date. As per order dated 23rd April, 2019, the ld. Division Bench, while finally disposing off the said writ, had directed the STF to take a considered view in the matter. Interim order dated 4th December, 2018 was continued till the time the STF took a decision as to the status of the property.
3. However, despite this order of the ld. Division Bench, the Petitioner's case is that she was made aware of a Whatsapp message, circulated on 1st June, 2020, as per which the DDA was taking action to demolish the property. Hence, the reliefs sought in the writ petition are as under:
"a) Pass such orders/direction in the nature of Mandamus thereby directing and the restraining the Respondent not to take any coercive step till the order dated 23.04.2019 is compiled in its true letter and spirit; and
b) Pass such and further order thereby granting the Petitioner the right to be heard by the STF as and when the issue of status of the property in question i.e. T-2, village Beguam Pur (Khasra No.110), New Delhi; and
c) Pass such and further orders thereby directing the Respondent to follow the Order dated 04.12.2018 & 23.04.2019 in its true letter and spirit; and
d) pass such other or further order or orders as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper."
Procedural History
4. This writ petition was first heard on 8th June, 2020, on which date demolition by the DDA had already begun. In view of the fact that ld. counsel for the DDA was to seek instructions in the matter, the demolition was stayed until the next date.
5. On 9th June, 2020, the DDA placed on record various documents to argue that the property was located in Khasra No.110 and the said land was acquired by the DDA way back in the 1970s, which acquisition was upheld by this Court. It was also argued that the Petitioner was merely an encroacher and, accordingly, dismissal of the writ was prayed of. Copies of the documents filed by the DDA were supplied to the Petitioner. Detailed oral submissions have been made by the parties. A series of written submissions with several documents attached therewith, have also been exchanged and placed for the Court's consideration.
6. On 11th June, 2020, an application has been filed by one Sh.Jagan S/o Sh. Musaddi Khan seeking impleadment. However, on the said date, the impleadment application was not on record. Submissions were briefly heard and the intervenor was directed to transmit the same to the Court Master through email. On the next date, i.e., 22nd June, 2020, whe
