W.P.(C)/14053/2026 of GAJENDER SINGH AND OTHERS Vs GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. on 23 September 2026

O R D E R

% 23.09.2026 CM APPL. 65768/2026 (for exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 14053/2026 & CM APPL. 65767/2026 (for interim orders)

1. Twenty individuals have filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, claiming to be owners of land situated in Village Jagatpur, Delhi. It is their contention that the Government of Delhi acquired part of the land in the said village, measuring 23 Bighas and 10 Biswas, in the year 1984 for construction of an embankment/bund and, thereafter, acquired a further parcel of land for construction of a biodiversity park.

2. The grievance raised in the present petition is that the State authorities are proposing to undertake a survey and demarcation exercise which may affect the land in the possession and ownership of the petitioners.

3. At the outset, Ms. Harshita Nathrani, learned counsel for the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi [“GNCTD”], who appears on advance notice, submits that another writ petition concerning a similar issue, being W.P.(C) 13732/2026, was listed and disposed of yesterday. She points out that four of the seven petitioners therein are also petitioners in the present petition, namely, petitioner No. 1, Gajender Singh S/o Shri Kripal Singh; petitioner No. 6, Ravinder Singh S/o Kripal Singh; petitioner No. 7, Manish Chaudhary S/o Shri Rajveer Singh; and petitioner No. 16, Vijay Pal S/o Shri Hukam Chand.

4. The reliefs sought in W.P.(C) 13732/2026 concerned the same landholding and were framed in the following terms: “It is therefore most respectfully prayed that respondent may be directed to revoke notice no. F.SDM/Burari/2026/3643-53 date 10.09.2026 and the respondent may be directed not to disposes/ remove from the property (remaining land measuring 19 bigha 13 biswa) falling in khasra no. 129/9/2, 10/1/2 of village Burari now in the abadi of village Jagatpur, Delhi.”

5. In the present writ petition, the petitioners have sought, inter alia, a direction for consideration of their representation concerning survey, demarcation and consequential steps, as well as orders restraining the respondents from conducting any fresh survey without supplying them copies of the earlier acquisition and demarcation proceedings.

6. It is, therefore, evident that, at least insofar as petitioner Nos. 1, 6, 7 and 16 are concerned, they have instituted two writ petitions before this

Court on substantially similar grounds, without disclosing the other proceedings in either petition.

7. Insofar as petitioner Nos. 1, 6, 7 and 16 are concerned, in view of the fact that they were also parties to W.P.(C) 13732/2026, Mr. Umesh Sharma seeks permission to withdraw the present petition insofar as these four petitioners are concerned. The permission is granted, subject to each of the said petitioners depositing costs of Rs.10,000/- with the Delhi High Court Bar Association Costs Account [A/C No. 15530110179338, IFSC No. UCBA0001553, Bank Name: UCO Bank, Branch: Delhi High Court], within one week from today. An affidavit of compliance shall be filed by the petitioners within two weeks thereafter.

8. A copy of this order shall also be furnished to the Honorary Secretary, Delhi High Court Bar Association.

9. W.P.(C) 13732/2026 was disposed of yesterday, i.e. on 22.09.2026, in the following terms: “1. The petitioners claim to be owners in possession of property falling in Khasra Nos. 129/9/2 and 10/1/2 of Revenue Estate, Village Burari, Delhi. It is contended that the property is ancestral in nature and is located within the abadi of Village Jagatpur, Delhi.

2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners assail notice No. F.SDM/Burari/2026/3643-53, issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Burari on 10.09.2026, which contemplates demarcation of government land in various khasras, including Khasra Nos. 129/9/2 and 10/1/2 of Village Burari. It is also stated in the notice that the Irrigation and Flood Control Department, Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi [“IFC”], has stated that some of the land in the area has been encroached, and sought delineation and identification of the aforesaid land.

3. Issue notice. Ms. Harshita Nathrani, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

4. According to the petitioners, the land originally owned by their family was ad-measuring 26 Bighas and 6 Biswas. Out of this land, initially 2 Bighas and 12 Biswas in Khasra No. 129/9/1 and 1 Bigha and 8 Biswas in Khasra No. 10/1/1 were acquired in 1984-85. Possession of the same was taken on 17.02.1984. Further, 2 Bighas 7 Biswas out of Khasra No. 129/9/2 and 1 Bigha 3 Biswas out of Khasra No. 10/1/2 were acquired in the year 2006, for the purpose of making a biodiversity park by Delhi Development Authority, and possession of the same was therefore taken on 29.05.2006.

5. As a result, the petitioners now claim to be owners in possession of the remaining land in the aforesaid khasras in Village Jagatpur.

6. Mr. Md. Hasan, learned counsel for the petitioners, states that the petitioners have no objection to demarcation and removal of encroachment, as far as the acquired land is concerned, but apprehend that this process would affect the unacquired land, which remains in their ownership and possession.

7. Ms. Nathrani clarifies, on instructions, that the process of demarcation and removal of encroachment is intended only for government land, including the parcels of land acquired in the aforesaid two acquisitions, and is not intended to affect any subsisting rights of ownership and possession.

8. In view of the aforesaid clarifications, no further orders are sought in this writ petition, which accordingly stands disposed of, alongwith the pending application.”

10. Insofar as the remaining petitioners are concerned, therefore, the issue stands addressed by the clarification recorded yesterday in W.P.(C) 13732/2026, namely, that the exercise of demarcation and removal of encroachment shall be confined to government land and shall not extend to unacquired land. Ms. Nathrani further states that any process for removal of encroachment shall be undertaken in accordance with law.

11. Mr. Sharma however submits that some of the petitioners are in possession of land which was the subject matter of the acquisition proceedings, but was neither demarcated nor taken into possession. In respect of such land, it is open to the concerned petitioners to take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.

12. The petition, alongwith the pending application, is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. PRATEEK JALAN, J SEPTEMBER 23, 2026 ‘B’/SD/