$~37 to 39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 12404/2021, CM APPL. 39006/2021 DR. SANJEEV KUMAR GARG & ANR. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Akshat Gupta and Mr. Sriram, Advocates.

versus GNCTD & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Raghvendra Upadhyay, Panel Counsel for GNCTD with Ms. Purnima Jain and Mr. Ankit Jaiswal, Advocates.

+ W.P.(C) 12423/2021, CM APPL. 39071/2021, CM APPL.

40941/2021 DHANANJAI SINGH JAMWAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajit Sharma, Advocate.

versus GNCTD & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Vaishali Gupta, Panel Counsel for GNCTD.

+ W.P.(C) 12430/2021, CM APPL. 39085/2021, CM APPL. 854/2022 CM APPL. 54141-54142/2022.

AKBAR AHMAD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Nizam Pasha, Mr. Sidharth Kaushik and Mr. Madhav Deepak, Advocates.

versus DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Vaishali Gupta, Panel Counsel for GNCTD.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 21.01.2026

1. These petitions are directed against order dated 25^th October, 2021, whereby the Department of Forests & Wildlife issued demolition notices to the Petitioners on the allegation that they had encroached upon forest land, granting them seven days’ time to vacate the premises, failing which their residential structures were liable to be demolished.

2. On 29^th October, 2021, upon considering the submissions advanced on behalf of the Petitioners, this Court granted them interim protection, restraining the Respondents from carrying out any demolition or eviction action pursuant to the impugned notices. The said interim protection was extended from time to time. Subsequently, on 26^th November, 2021, this Court passed the following order:

“These petitions were heard by the Court and interim orders of protection made in light of the apprehension of imminent eviction. From the affidavits which have been filed on behalf of the State respondents, the Court is apprised that the entire exercise of identification and safeguarding of forest land was undertaken by the respondents pursuant to the directions issuedbythe National GreenTribunal inthematter of SonyaGhosh Versus Goverment ofNCTofDelhi andOthers Mr. Satyakam, who appears for the respondents, however, draws the attention of the Court to challenges to the demarcation undertaken in 2017 and 2019 as are raised and urged by the petitioners in the affidavits in rejoinder which have been filed. Learned counsel in his usual fairness suggested that in order to allay all such doubts, the respondents are willing to undertake an exercise of verification by demarcation so that the veracity of the doubts that are raised may be duly evaluated and the entire controversy laid to rest. The aforesaid suggestion as mooted is accepted by learnedcounsels appearing for thepetitioners.

In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the considered view that the suggestion as put forth would merit acceptance. Accordingly, the claims of the petitioners as raised in this batch and which also relate to the actual location of their respective properties or parts thereof existing on khasras which are asserted to be part of forest land may be duly verified by way of demarcation in order that the controversy raised in these writ petitions may be finally laid to rest. The aforesaid exercise shall be undertaken at the cost of the petitioners. The exercise may be completed within a period of four weeks from today and a status report drawn by the respondents in this respect. The report may be circulated amongst parties on or before the next datefixed.

List this matter on07.01.2022.”

3. In terms of the aforesaid directions, demarcation was required to be carried out at the cost of the Petitioners, within a stipulated time frame, and a status report was to be filed by the Respondents before this Court. The interim orders have continued to operate in favour of the Petitioners, restraining the Respondents from taking any action pursuant to the impugned notices. However, despite the lapse of more than four y