A writ of mandamus can only be issued when there is a clear legal right established by the petitioner, along with a corresponding duty of the respondent, which was lacking in this case.

ORDER

Chandra Dhari Singh, J. (Oral)

CM APPL. 49691/2022

Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 15947/2022

1. The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking following reliefs:

"A. Writ of mandamus, order, direction or any other appropriate writ, as this Hon'ble Court deem fit in the present facts and circumstances of the case, directing the Respondent No. 1 to vacate the land in question, that is, Khasra No. 25/22/1 (1-10), because this land belongs to the Petitioner and other co- allottees.

B. Writ of mandamus, order, direction or any other appropriate writ, as this Hon'ble Court deem fit in the present facts and circumstances of the case, directing the Respondent No. 1 to remove all the encroachments or fixtures installed by it on the land in question, that is, Khasra No. 25/22/1 (1-10), and to restore the land to its previous state as was found when Respondent No. 1 took possession of it.

C. Writ of mandamus, order, direction or any other appropriate writ, as this Hon'ble Court deem fit in the present facts and circumstances of the case, directing the Respondent No. 2 to clearly identify, delineate or demarcate the boundaries of the land in question, that is, Khasra No. 25/22/1 (1-10), to the extent that it can be then clearly distinguished from the lands made available for forest. So that no confusion prevails."

2. The land comprised in Khasra No. 134 min (0-10), Khasra No. 33/2, and Khasra No. 25/22/1 (1-10) situated in revenue estate of Village Devli, New Delhi were allotted to the petitioner and his brothers vide order dated 19th May 2000 passed by the Consolidation Officer, Hauz Khas, New Delhi under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation & Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 in case no. 5/CO/98. Pursuant to the allotment, the respondent no. 1, Department of Forests and Wildlife, demarcated the land into three pieces on 16th December 2002, the Kabza Karyavahi took place and Titama Field Book was prepared.

3. The petitioner is before this Court alleging that the respondent no. 1 has forcefully entered into one of the abovesaid lands, i.e., Khasra No. 25/22/1 (1-0) on 9th November 2021, demolished a room and took possession of the same.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the respondent no. 1, entered the land in question forcefully, despite protest by the petitioner and demolished a room constructed on the part of the land. The petitioner made a police complaint on 9th November 2021, however, no FIR has been registered by the Police.

5. It is submitted that the allottees of the land, in apprehension that the land in question had been notified and declared as forest land, filed an application on 11th November 2021 under Section 4(1)(c) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927 seeking de-notification of the forest land, if notified. It is submitted that as per the report dated 7th September 2012 of the Special Task Force, the Khasra No. 25/22/1 (1-0) does not find mention in the table of the Khasra No's made available for the purpose of creation of reserved forest.

6. It is further submitted that another application dated 12th November 2021 was made by the legal heirs of one of the allottees to the Tehsildar, Saket seeking delineation the boundaries of the land in question from the adjoining lands, however, no action was taken on the said application.

7. Therefore, it is prayed on behalf of the petitioner that writ in the nature of mandamus may be issu