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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Neeta Bhardwaj - Appellant
Versus
Kamlesh Sharma - Respondent
FAO 36 of 2021 & CM Appls. 2914 of 2021, 10442 of 2021, 10444 of 2021, 20904 of 2021, 23819 of 2021, 25868 of 2021, 25869 of 2021, 25870 of 2021, 25884 of 2021, 43946 of 2021, 3172 of 2022, 3455 of 2022, 5641 of 2022 and 5642 of 2022 with CM (M) 323 of 20
Decided On : 01-02-2022




Court emphasized the authority of the Administrator in managing religious premises, focusing on the removal of unauthorized occupants and the proper structuring of redevelopment plans.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Law - Development and Management of Religious Premises - The court directed the removal of unauthorized occupants, addressed water supply issues, and mandated the reconstruction of dilapidated dharamshalas at Kalkaji Mandir. Recommendations were made regarding tehbazari and development funds with a deadline set for submission of reports. (Paras 5, 10, 16, 28)

(B) Property Law - Rights of Licensees - The court acknowledged the status of a shopkeeper as a licensee concerning occupying premises and outlined the legal process for dispossession. (Paras 60, 62)

Facts of the case:
Multiple matters related to redevelopment efforts at Kalkaji Mandir addressed grievances concerning water supply, encroachments, and unauthorized occupancies within the temple premises. (Paras 5, 10, 41)

Findings of Court:
The Administrator is tasked with overseeing redevelopment, including removing illegal structures and determining tehbazari based on shop categories. (Paras 20, 32)

Issues: The main issues included the appropriate management of unauthorized occupancy at the religious site and the restructuring of shop agreements and renovations. (Paras 8, 12, 20)

Ratio Decidendi: The court detailed procedures related to the property rights of licensees and the responsibility of the Administrator in the redevelopment process, emphasizing the need for authorized compliance with court orders and community consultation. (Paras 60, 62)

Result: Specific directives issued for the removal of jhuggis and unauthorized occupants along with redevelopment plan submissions due within specified timeframes.

Table of Content
1. court's process regarding reports on kalkaji mandir (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. djb's actions for water and sewage in the mandir complex (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. removal of unauthorized constructions and jhuggi dwellers (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. conditions affecting dharamshalas and occupancy (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. creation of temporary shops amidst redevelopment (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
6. identification and allotment of shopkeepers (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 27)
7. contribution for redevelopment by baridars (Para 32 , 33 , 34)
8. recovery of mesne profits/damages from illegal occupant (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45)
9. suit against unauthorized occupants of the dharamshala (Para 50 , 51 , 52 , 54)
10. legal status of occupant and case recommendations (Para 57 , 58 , 60 , 61 , 62)
11. order compliance and report submission (Para 67 , 68 , 69 , 70)

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done by video conferencing.

2. These matters pertain to the Kalkaji Mandir, which this Court has been hearing from time to time. These are part-heard matters.

3. In terms of the order dated 21st December 2021, this Court received a detailed report from the Ld. Administrator dated 13th January, 2022 (hereinafter "Report No.2"). The recommendations from the said Report No.2 were recorded in the order dated 14th January, 2022. The various parties before this Court in these matters were permitted to receive copies of the said report and make submissions in respect of those recommendations.

4. Further, this Court has received an additional Report dated 31st January, 2022 (hereinafter "Report No.3") from the ld. Administrator and has reviewed the progress of actions taken pursuant to such recommendations. An overview of the same is as follows.

Supply of Water and Laying Down of Sewage Lines

5. Vide order dated 15th November, 2021, this Court had directed the Delhi Jal Board (hereinafter "DJB") to inspect the premises of the Kalkaji Mandir and to take immediate steps for laying down a temporary pipeline for an uninterrupted supply of drinking water as also for supplying running water to the toilet complexes. The DJB was also directed to place on record a status report in respect of the same. Pursuant to the said order, a Report dated 28th January, 2022 has been filed by Ms. Sangeeta Bharti, ld. Standing Counsel, on behalf of the DJB. The said report has been signed by Mr. Brijnandan Gupta, who is Executive Engineer, (M)51, DJB. As per the said report, the following works have been executed by DJB:

    "Pursuant to the directions of this Hon'ble Court, the following works were executed by Delhi Jal Board.

    i. Water line for supplying of water to all 4 Piyaos has been laid and water supply has been started.

    ii. The Sewer line has been laid in the Parking area of Kalkaji Mandir Complex and made functional."

6. Report No.3 submitted on behalf of the ld. Administrator has recorded some grievances that were raised, i.e., the sewer lines within the premises of the Kalkaji Mandir, are still choked and there is an overflow of water. Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta, Zonal Engineer, Delhi Jal Board has assured the ld. Administrator that he would look into the matter.

7. Accordingly, it is directed that the team from the DJB shall be sent to inspect the premises, and ensure that the choking, leakage and overflow of water, if any, is dealt with and repaired expediently, so that the premises of the Mandir are kept clean. Let a status report be filed by Ms. Bharti on behalf of the DJB by the next date.

Removal of unauthorised construction and encroachments

8. Mr. Nitin Jain, ld. counsel, who appears for 64 shopkeepers submits that all the clients he represents have vacated their respective shops. This position is also confirmed by Ms. Kawalpreet Kaur appearing on behalf of 11 shopkeepers.

9. Ms. Samapika Biswal, ld. Counsel, appearing for the ld. Administrator, submits that all the shopkeepers, except Mr. Radhey Shyam who is the shopkeeper of Shop

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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