ANJUMAN-E-HAIDER Vs. CHAIRMAN NDMC, ARCHNA ARORA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WP (C) No.4907/2005 was filed inter alia seeking directions for demarcation of the boundaries of the properties, described in paras 6 and 7 of the petition, which were stated to be under the management and administration of the petitioner. The said writ petition was disposed of on 09.11.2005 with a direction to Government of NCT of Delhi to require its Revenue Assistant to demarcate the boundary of the said properties, i.e. Chhote Karbala (Khasra No. 23), Kanati Masjid (Khasra No. 29), Dargah Shah-E-Mardan (Khasra No. 39/1&39) (hereinafter referred to as "Dargah") and Naqqar Khana (Khasra No.39). The demarcation was to be completed within six months from the date of the order. The respondent No.1 in the writ petition was directed to construct a boundary wall wherever needed so that the Wakf land could be protected.

(2.) CM No. 12048/2006 was filed by NDMC in WP(C) No. 4907/2005 seeking certain clarifications of the directions issued vide order dated 09.11.2005. While dealing with the said application vide order dated 03.04.2007, the learned Single Judge noted that in respect of the vacant land around Dargah measured about 09 bighas, Dargah was shown as the owner of Khasra No. 39 and the same was built up and under possession of Dargah. As regards Naqqar Khana, which was the fourth property, the learned Single Judged noted that as per Demarcation Report, DDA had claimed that the said portion of the land to be their site No. 8 and for that reasons, the said portion was not demarcated in the report dated 08.05.2006. It was further observed that another demarcation exercise was carried out on 13.06.2006 in respect of site No. 8 of DDA, in the presence of DDA officials and the demarcation of site No. 8 was found to be correct, as per map of the Survey and Settlement Branch II of DDA. Therefore, the demarcation of DDA site No. 8 had taken place without difficulty. It was also noted by the learned Single Judge that when NDMC commenced construction of boundary wall in regard to ,,Dargah, it was found that one portion of DDA site No. 4 abutted that portion. The learned Single Judge was of the view that since Naqqar Khana was not a Wakf property as per demarcation report, it was not possible to direct NDMC to erect a boundary wall in respect of that property. The learned Single Judge noted that as per Demarcation Report, the vacant land surrounding ,,Dargah was also measured and indicated in the rough sketch enclosed to the report. He also noted the contention of DDA counsel that the right hand top portion of site No. 4 of DDA slightly overlapped the left hand corner of ,,Dargah, and to the extent of such overlapping, DDA had an objection to the boundary wall being constructed, because some portions of DDA land were falling within the land of ,,Dargah. The learned Single Judge also noted that during two exercise of demarcation, DDA had not raised the plea of the aforesaid overlapping. A controversy was raised before the learned Single Judge with respect to the vacant land surrounding ,,Dargah. An internal note from the office of SDM, Defence Colony was produced before the learned Single Judge stating therein that the vacant land surrounding ,,Dargah was also measured in compliance of the order of the Court though Government was shown owner of the said land in Revenue/Nazul record. A copy of Jamabandi was also enclosed to the said note.

(3.) A number of CMs, thereafter, came to be filed in WP(C) No. 4907/2005. Taking note of the orders dated 09.11.2005 and 03.04.2007, the matter was closed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 11.01.2012. WP(C) No. 646/2012 was then filed as a Public Interest Litigation, alleging grabbing of open spaces/parks inside and around B.K. Dutt colony. This is also the case of the petitioners in WP(C) No. 646/2012 that demarcation was carried out behind the back of the residents of the colony and it was falsely held out during demarcation that the said lands were of religious significance to a particular community. They inter alia sought direction to the respondents to evict all encroachers from DDA/L&DO/Government owned spaces/parks/unused land in the area of B.K. Dutt Colony and destruction of illegal sign boards, etc. on the aforesaid land.