Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court

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