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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 46676

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
HANUMAN YADAV & ORS. VS. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 8158/2025



##PAGE1##

$~12

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 8158/2025

ISHWAR SINGH BASHISTA & ORS. .....Petitioners

Through: Mr. Udayan Jain, Mr. Amit Sherawat,

Mr. Harsh Jaiswal, Mr. Ranjan

Mishra, Ms. Geetika Iyar, Advocates

versus

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents

Through: Mr. Subhash Tanwar, SPC with Mr.

Sandeep Mishra, Mr. Harshit

Deshwal, Ms. Priyanka Kumari, Ms.

Ritu Tanwar and Mr. Vipin Kumar,

Advocates for R-1/UOI

Mr. Rajesh Katyal and Ms. Seema

Katyal, Advocates for R-2/NCRTC

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 23.12.2025

1. We have heard the respective counsels for the parties, particularly the

learned counsel for respondent no. 2, on the aspect of compensation not

having been paid to the petitioners.

2. The petitioners rely on the judgment delivered in Suit No. 177 of 2009

by the Court of SCJ-cum-RC (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, titled Shri

Pritam Singh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors dated 14th September, 2012

3. According to him, vide judgment and decree dated 14th September,

2012, the defendants were as such the defendant no. 1/Union of India,

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 21:12:06

##PAGE2##

defendant no. 2/Lt. Governor/Administrator of National Capital Territory of

Delhi and defendant no. 3/Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi

through Chief Secretary, New Delhi and a declaration was ordered that that

the plaintiffs/petitioners herein are in possession of the land khasra no. 457

min. measuring 2 bighas situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Kilokri,

Delhi as occupancy tenant. Accordingly, directions were issued to incorporate

or mutate the aforesaid property in the name of the present petitioners in the

revenue records. The adjudication in the said Civil Suit in favour of the

petitioners was based on the following issues:-

“1.Whether the plaintiff has got any right, title or interest over

the suit property in question?

2.Whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable for want

of notice U/Sec. 53B of Delhi Development Act?

3.Whether this court has no jurisdiction in view of DLR Act?

4.Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of declaration

and injunction as prayed for?

5.Whether the defendants have committed violation of the

injunction order dated 17.2.1994?

6.Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the relief prayed for in the

suit?

7.Relief.”

4. It appears that the aforesaid land was acquired by respondent no. 2 for

its project and for the said purpose, a draft Re-settlement Plan Project was

authored by respondent no. 2, which could be traced on record as Annexure

P-3.

5. The clause 5 of the said document reads thus:-

“5. The land acquisition and resettlement impact assessed

through project census survey includes acquisition of

government land and 09 private structures. It was found that

0.0432 hectares of government land has 3 households as

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 21:12:06

##PAGE3##

occupancy tenants on connecting line SKK to Jungpura and 08

individual flats owned by 08 households in an

apartment/building will be affected as falling within the

corridor of impact i.e 5m either side of the viaduct due to safety

reasons. These 08 individual flats needs to be

purchased/acquired or temporarily shifted as per wish of flat

owners. One temporary structure, open from three side belong

to Resident Welfare Association (RWA) will also be affected. In

addition to 9 private structures, there are 5 public properties

(Annexure-5) also affected due to the proposed alignment. The

impact is found significant because all 08 households will be

physically displaced/temporarily shifted. The summary findings

are presented in the follow

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top