$~J * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on: 01.04.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 04 .04.2026 + W.P.(C) 4075/2026 & CM APPL. 19990/2026 MOHAMMAD REHAN ………Petitioner Through: Mr. Wajeeh Shafiq, Mr. Rukhsar Ahmed, Advs.

versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ………Respondents Through: Mr. R. K. Dhawan, SC for DDA, Ms. Nisha Dhawan, Mr. Pawan Karan Deo, Mr. V. K. Teng, Advs. for R1-2 Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, SC with Mrs. K. Kaomudi Kiran Pathak, Mr. M. S. Akhtar, Ms. Joohu Kumari, Advs. for R3 CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

J U D G M E N T

1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:-

“a) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other analogous Writ, Order or Direction against the respondents thereby quashing the impugned notice no. F1(3)2026/HD-

VII/Misc./1517 dated 13.03.2026;

b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other analogous Writ, Order or Direction against the respondents thereby restraining the respondents from causing any demolition at the petitioner’s property, i.e., house no. D-60 [earlier E-1] Gali no. 5, Shastri Park, Seelampur, North East delhi-

110053;

c) Pass any such and further order or direction(s) in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents as deemed fit in the interest of justice.”

2. The petitioner i.e., Sh. Mohammad Rehan, son of Sh. Sami Ahmed, is resident of House No.D-60, Gali No.5, Shastri Park, East Delhi-

110053.

3. The respondent No. 1 is Delhi Development Authority (“DDA”), and respondent No. 2 is Deputy Director (Horticulture), Horticulture Division-VII, DDA, School Block, Shakarpur, Delhi-110092.

4. The Land Acquisition Collector, was impleaded as respondent No. 3 vide order dated 30.03.2026.

FACTUAL MATRIX AS PER THE PETITONER

5. The case of the petitioner is that one Sh. Budha, who was owner of 15 Bigha 6 Biswa of land in Khasra no. 1 etc/74/1 Village Gonda Chohan Khadar, Illaqa Shahdara, Delhi, sold out of the said land a plot admeasuring 300 sq. yards (“land in question”) to Sh. Mohd. Yunus vide registered sale deed dated 03.06.1969.

6. Later, vide transfer documents dated 24.11.1983, Sh. Mohd. Yunus divided the said plot in two plots of 150 sq. yards each and transferred them to petitioner’s grandfather i.e., Sh. Saeed Ahmed and petitioner’s grandmother i.e., Smt. Zainab Begum. Petitioner’s grandparents had 4 sons and 4 daughters and were residing in house constructed on the land in question (“property in question”). On 21.11.1995, petitioner’s grandfather i.e., Sh. Saeed Ahmed, gifted his 4 daughters 25 sq. yards each out of his 150 sq. yards plot.

7. Smt. Zainab Begum expired on 17.06.2014 and Sh. Saeed Ahmed, expired on 25.08.2019. Subsequently, their 4 daughters relinquished their share in the property in favour of their 4 brothers.

8. Currently, petitioner along with his wife, father, mother, brother along his wife and three aunts along with their children reside in the house/ property in question. Earlier the address of the property was E-1, Gali no.5, Shastri Park and now the new address is D-60, Shastri Park.

9. In 2020, the flyover at the Karawal Nagar-Ghonda- Brijpuri Junction, North East Delhi was inaugurated without disturbing the property in question in anyway. It was only on 15.03.2026, that the impugned notice no. F1(3)2026/HD-VII/Misc./1517 dated 13.03.2026 (“impugned notice”) issued by respondent No. 2 was put on the petitioner’s house, which referred the property as Chauchan Khadar DDA Park and stated that on 01.04.2026 any encroachment/unauthorized constructions will be demolished. The impugned notice is reproduced as under:-

10. Hence, the present petition.

11. When the matter first came for hearing before the Court, this Court vide order dated 30.03.2026 directed that “no demolition as regards to the petitioner’s property shall take place till the matter is heard”.

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

12. Mr. Shafiq, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the impugned notice is in violation