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