AJIT SINGH Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment and order of the learned Single Judge, dismissing writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution - W.P.(C) 10499 and 10500/2004, initiated by the appellants, against the Delhi Development Authority ("DDA") seeking certain directions.

(2.) The appellants were aggrieved by a decision of DDA to carve out small plots on the land designated as institutional housing, proposing it for allotment to slum dwellers sought to be settled as a consequence of relocation. Land comprised in Pocket-11 was earmarked, partly for carving plots to be allotted under the scheme of "Large Scale Acquisition Development and Disposal of Land in Delhi" formulated in 1961 and partly for institutional housing. The appellants were allotted a plot bearing No. 26 admeasuring 208.93 sq. mtrs. in Pocket-11 according to their entitlement, as their lands too had been acquired. The appellants had argued that since they accepted a plot, which was offered to them on the basis of the existing Zonal Development Plan, DDA was estopped from changing use of the land designated as institutional housing. It was also argued that without amending the Zonal Development Plan, DDA could not change the land use. The appellants had, besides urging estoppel, submitted that earmarking of the lands in question amounted to unauthorized change of provisions of the Master Plan which could not have been resorted to. It had initially been argued that the earmarking of lands for relocation of slum dwellers amounted to illegal diversion of acquired lands, and no longer permissible, on account of a Division Bench ruling in Wazirpur Bartan Nirmata Sangh v. Union of India and Ors., 2003 103 DLT 654.

(3.) The DDA's stand was that the Zonal Development Plan designated land use as "housing/residential", in respect of the disputed site though for institutional housing and that as long as land use was not changed, it was irrelevant whether it was used for the purpose of residence of slum dwellers or residence of those employed in institutions. The Lay Out Screening Committee of DDA considered population density norms prescribed by Master Plan Delhi-2001. It found that if 236 plots measuring 18 sq. mtrs. and 664 plots admeasuring 12.5 sq. mtrs. were carved out on the land in dispute and allotted to slum dwellers, such population density norms would not be adversely affected. DDA argued that Master Plan norms relating to population density were adhered to. The DDA stated that carving out residential plots on the lands in question was not by violating the Master Plan or Zonal Development Plan. DDA also contended that micro level layout planning is legally sanctioned and relied on several judgments to the effect that the same is within the domain of DDA, without necessity of amending the Master Plan or Zonal Development Plan.