Delhi HC quashes DDA demolition notice for ‘encroachment’ near Mehrauli Archaeological Park: ‘Residents not told in advance’

The bench quashed the December 12, 2022, demolition notice and directed the DDA to commence the process anew, “ensuring that all petitioners are accorded a fair and reasonable opportunity to be heard” as per the DDA Act before any further demolition action is initiated. Disposing of the matter, the court said this exercise shall be completed within three months from today.

The order came in a batch of pleas challenging the demolition process of “removing encroachments” around Mehrauli Archaeological Park undertaken by DDA. There were several petitions also filed before a single judge bench of the HC and a PIL on the same issue; subsequently, given the commonality of issues and contentions, the bench tagged all the matters and passed a consolidated judgment.

The core of the petitioners’ grievances was the actual location of their properties, as depicted on the maps utilised by the authorities to carry out the demarcation. They challenged the accuracy of these cartographic representations and, consequently, the validity of the demarcation report that followed.

The bench, however, said this would call for an in-depth evaluation of technical details which is “outside the purview of judicial examination by a writ court” and calls for the application of specialised knowledge which is the domain of expert bodies designated for land survey and demarcation.

The bench, therefore, clarified that it has not examined the merits of the demarcation report dated December 21, 2021, filed in the matter, adding that while under writ jurisdiction the High Court has broad authority, however, its “scope is not without limits”.

The bench also said it cannot act as a civil court to affirm the petitioners’ status as owners or lawful occupants of the properties in dispute, especially since the DDA had strongly opposed their claim “based on their evaluation of the evidence provided”. “Such declarations are rightly within the jurisdiction of civil courts, where, through an appropriate trial, all evidence can be considered in its entirety,” the bench said.

The DDA contended that demolition was being conducted as an effort to conserve the forest area and the park and that they are proceeding under HC supervision. The bench, however, said that regardless of the environmental imperatives or the court’s prior orders, the DDA’s obligation to act within the framework of the law and ensure procedural fairness to those affected by its actions remains intact.