‘Can’t overreach court like this’: Delhi HC frowns as DDA demolishes Sainik Farms bungalow

The DDA had issued a show-cause notice on October 13 alleging that certain parts were constructed on the DDA’s green zone, following which an opportunity of hearing was given. Subsequently, on October 30, the DDA passed an order for demolition, which was challenged by Azher before the Delhi High Court in November. On December 10, the DDA had reportedly given an oral assurance that it would not take any coercive action. The assurance was, however, not recorded in any court order. Azher, meanwhile, in an application, had sought that no coercive steps be taken by the DDA till the next date of hearing.

He also filed a clarificatory application before the Supreme Court in the MC Mehta case of 1985, the landmark case which established the principle of absolute liability, holding hazardous industries strictly liable for harm without exceptions.The SC has been routinely hearing all issues pertaining to air pollution under this landmark case.

While hearing this petition, the Supreme Court had in April sought responses from the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, the DDA, the MCD and the Delhi government, asking “why there is an attempt to protect illegal structures of affluent people”. The clarificatory application sought the SC’s clarification if the Delhi HC can deal with Azher’s matter or whether SC will have to, given that Sainik Farms falls under DDA’s list of unauthorised affluent colonies, which remain outside the ambit of regularisation, according to DDA.

Highlighting that even before a clarification could be obtained in this regard from the SC and before Delhi HC could be informed about it, DDA went ahead with the demolition, Azher’s counsels, senior advocate P S Bindra and advocate Naunidh Singh Arora told the High Court, “Matter was kept on 18th December (before Delhi HC) because matter (clarificatory application) is in SC on 17th December…please take action (against the authorities), it is very very unfortunate…As far as possession is concerned, they may not do anything further.”

Justice Singh, orally responding to DDA’s counsel R K Dhawan, said, “This is overreaching the court … and someone will pay heavily for this…This is the respect they show the court.”

Noting that Azher’s application, where he was seeking that no coercive action be taken against his property, has been made infructuous owing to the demolition, the court dismissed it.

Justice Singh, however, added that she will deal with the issue of demolition when the main plea comes up for hearing on December 18.

Justice Singh went on to remark: “I’m going to make observations that you can’t overreach court orders like this. An understanding was ongoing, he mentioned the matter after about 4:30 pm (on December 10, when the matter was last heard) when I said ‘Mr Dhawan (DDA’s counsel) I’ve been given an assurance (on behalf of DDA)’.”

Notably, the HC, in an order on November 12, had directed the DDA to file a short affidavit, bringing forth its stand on if the “affluent unauthorised colonies” are excluded from National Capital Territory of Delhi (Recognition of Property Rights of Residents in Unauthorised Colonies) Regulations, 2019 and if the DDA intends to grant protection to the said colonies under National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Act, 2011.