Delhi High Court Stays The Eviction/Demolition of Jhuggi Till Further Orders
Recently, Hon’ble Delhi High court granted an stay in favor of the Jhuggi dweller who has been informed verbally that his Jhuggi will be demolished and no provision for his rehabilitation has been made as he is ineligible for that. The Hon’ble court in its interim order held that “Respondents are directed to stay their hands qua sealing, eviction and/or demolition with respect to the Petitioner’s Jhuggi until the next date of hearing”
BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
By way of the present Petition, the Petitioners are inter-alia seeking a direction from the Respondent No. 1/DDA to set aside the order dated 22.03.2023 issued by the Appellate Authority appointed by Respondent No.1/DDA. The Petition has been filed by Petitioner who is a jhuggi dweller, resident of Bhoomiheen Camp at Kalkaji, New Delhi. The grievance of the Petitioner is that he was informed verbally on 12.06.2023 that the jhuggis in which he is residing may be demolished.
The Petitioner is aggrieved by the actions of the Eligibility Determination Committee [hereinafter referred to as “EDC”] set up by Respondent No.1/DDA. The EDC had on 07.11.2022 released a list of candidates who were declared as ineligible for allotment of an alternate dwelling/accommodation under the 2015 Policy, which included the name of the Petitioner. Subsequently, the Petitioner received letter informing him of his ineligibility inter-alia on account of non-availability of identity related documents even after all relevant documents were produced.
CONTENTION OF THE PETITIONER
Mr. Nishant Kumar & Ms. Nisha Rawat, Learned counsels for petitioner essentially contended that the orders were passed without conducting any independent hearing of their individual Appeals. It was further contended that the Petitioner has one or more of the requisite identity documents and provided the details of his identity documents in Paragraph 2 (iv) of the present Petition. However, despite the same, their representations have been rejected by the Appellate Authority. 6.
Advancing his arguments further, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the Petitioner ineligibility is based on the fact that he was unable to produce a ration card. However, Counsel for the Petitioner further contends that despite applying for the same several years ago, no ration card has been issued to them.
Learned Counsel further submitted that if in the meantime, Respondent No.1/DDA is allowed to continue with its demolition, this Petition will become infructuous and irreparable harm and injury will be caused to the Petitioner. Mr. Nishant Kumar submitted that in the interregnum, the Hon’ble Court may stay action of the Respondents of sealing and evicting the Petitioner from his home and/or demolition.
CONTENTION OF THE OPP. PARTIES
Per contra learned counsel for the DDA controverts the contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner. In this regard, he draws the attention of the Court to the orders passed by the Appellate Authority to submit that these orders have been passed by the Appellate Authority after giving due and adequate consideration to the 2015 Policy as well as the documents placed on record by the Petitioner, who are before this Court.
HON’BLE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS
Hon’ble Ms. Justice Tara Vitasta Gunju observed that the matter requires further examination and issued notice to the respondents and further the Hon’ble court directed to respondents to file counter affidavit and thereafter rejoinders.
In the meantime, Hon’ble court directed to stay their hands qua sealing, eviction and/or demolition with respect to the Petitioner’s Jhuggi until the next date of hearing.
Case Title:- Shri Nirnajan Kandar Vs. Delhi Development authority & others
Case no. :- W.P.(C) 8566/2023
Order date :- 23.06.2023
Counsel For Petitioner:
Adv. Nishant Kumar Balyan
Adv. Nisha Rawat