The Delhi High Court has invalidated a demolition notice issued by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) targeting "unauthorized" constructions near the Mehrauli Archaeological Park. The court directed the DDA to restart the process, emphasizing the importance of granting a fair hearing to the affected parties before taking further action on alleged encroachments. The court highlighted procedural lapses, stating that no intimation was issued to the petitioners before the demolition notice, and quashed the notice issued in December 2022. The ruling underscores the need for administrative actions to adhere to statutory procedures and principles of natural justice.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court invalidated a demolition notice issued by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in December 2022, targeting "unauthorised" constructions near the Mehrauli Archaeological Park. The court, led by Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, directed the DDA to restart the process, emphasizing the importance of granting a fair hearing to the affected parties before any further action is taken on alleged encroachments.
The bench, also including Justice Sanjeev Narula, declared that the DDA must adhere to legal obligations and ensure procedural fairness, irrespective of environmental concerns or prior court orders. The decision followed a series of petitions challenging the demolition notice, asserting that the targeted properties in Ladha Sarai village were misidentified, and the demarcation report could not be relied upon.
Highlighting a crucial procedural lapse, the court stated, "Since it is an admitted position that no intimation was issued to the petitioners prior to the demolition notice as mandated by the provisions of the DDA Act, we hereby quash the demolition notice issued on 12th December 2022."
Furthermore, the court directed the DDA to initiate the process anew, ensuring that all petitioners are given a fair opportunity to be heard within three months from the date of the order. While the court acknowledged its limitations in resolving boundary disputes, it underscored the DDA's obligation to follow statutory procedures and principles of natural justice.
The court rejected the argument that its jurisdiction extended to determining property ownership but upheld the petitioners' claim that they were not afforded the opportunity to present their case before the authorities—a right enshrined in the DDA Act.
In response to the petitions, the DDA defended its stance, asserting that the contested land within the Southern Central Ridge, especially the Park, held immense historical and cultural significance. The authority argued that the area was designated as 'green' in the Master Plan of Delhi, emphasizing its commitment to conserving the Mehrauli Heritage Zone.
This ruling underscores the delicate balance between conservation efforts and the protection of individual property rights, emphasizing the need for administrative actions to adhere to statutory procedures and principles of natural justice.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
