Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

Delhi High Court Quashes DDA Demolition Notice for Mehrauli Park, Asserts: Procedural Fairness Must Stand Intact

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has quashed a demolition notice issued by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), which targeted unauthorized constructions in the Mehrauli Archaeological Park. The Court underscored the importance of procedural fairness, stating, “Principles of natural justice demand that those whose interests are adversely affected by an administrative action, must be given a chance to be heard.”

The bench, comprising the Hon’ble Chief Justice and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Narula, delivered the judgment on 8th November 2023, in response to the pleas of several petitioners claiming ownership of properties within the park’s khasra No. 1151/3 of Village Mehrauli. The petitioners had challenged the DDA’s demolition order, arguing that it was unfairly singling out their properties without following due legal process.

The Court noted the complexities involved in the demarcation of land, which has been a subject of contention between the petitioners and the DDA. “The core of Petitioners’ grievances is the actual location of their properties, as depicted on the maps utilized by the authorities to carry out the demarcation,” Justice Narula observed. In view of this, the Court has directed the DDA to reissue the demolition notice, ensuring that all affected parties are given a fair opportunity to present their case, as mandated by the DDA Act.

The decision has significant implications for the ongoing efforts to conserve the heritage zone of Mehrauli. While the Court recognized the DDA’s responsibility to maintain the area, it emphasized that conservation efforts must not override the necessity of following the due process of law. The Court’s decision reaffirms the right of individuals to be heard before being deprived of their property, setting a precedent for procedural fairness in administrative actions.

The High Court has clarified that it has not examined the merits of the demarcation report dated 21st December 2021 and has left all rights and contentions of the parties open. This move is seen as a way to ensure that the intricate disputes over boundary delineations are resolved by competent authorities or civil courts, which are better equipped to handle such technical matters.

The ruling has been welcomed by the petitioners’ advocates as a triumph of justice and fair play. The DDA is expected to respond to the Court’s directions by initiating a new process that adheres strictly to the legal procedures established for such actions.

Date of Decision: 08 November, 2023

DARGHA NAJEEBUDDIN FIRDOUSI VS  DELHI DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR 

Latest Legal News