Tafseer Ahmad Vs Delhi Development Authority and Anr.

¶1

$~59

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 05.08.2025

¶4

- W.P.(C) 11589/2025 & CM Appl. 47434/2025

¶5

TAFSEER AHMAD .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Ghose, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Firoz Iqbal Khan, Mr. Mohit Garg & Mr. Mohd. Faizan, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR. ....Respondents Through: Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, SC with Mr. Aditya Verma, Adv. for R-1. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, SC with Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha & Ms. K.K. Kiran Pathak, Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Advs. for R-2.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral)

¶9

This matter was received on transfer from the Roster Bench.

¶10

The Court had briefly heard the parties on 04.08.2025 and thereafter, listed the matter for instructions from the Respondents today.

¶11

Although, there are multiple prayers made in the present Petition. Learned Senior Counsel, on instructions, submits that the Petitioner is limiting his prayer to a direction for conducting an appropriate demarcation of Khasra No. 208 [admeasuring 1 Bigha 8 Biswa] in Jasola Village, Jamia Nagar – 110025 [hereinafter referred to as “subject property”].

¶12

It is the case of the Petitioner that he is in possession of the property situated at E-59/2, Jasola Village, Jamia Nagar, Delhi – 110025 and that

¶13

Signature Not Verified

¶14

Digitally Signed By:HONEY ARORA Signing Da te:0 8.08.2025 13:56:43

¶15

W.P.(C) 11589/2025 Page 1 of 3

¶16

Respondent No. 1/ DDA is undertaking an exercise to take possession of lands which have previously been acquired by DDA in compliance of the order dated 06.02.2025 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) 414/2018 captioned Inder Singh & Ors. v. Land Acquisition Collector (South-East) & Anr .

¶17

Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, submits that the Petitioner limits his prayer in the present Petition to the Respondents conducting an appropriate demarcation in respect of the subject property.

¶18

Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1, who appears on advance service, submits that steps have been taken by Respondent No. 1 in pursuance of the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court. However, they have not been able to comply with the same on account of non-availability of the officials of Respondent No. 2.

¶19

Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2 refutes this contention.

¶20

However, and given that the only prayer is for conduct of an appropriate demarcation which is essential for compliance of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, this Court deems it apposite to dispose of the present Petition passing the following directions:

¶21

(i) The concerned officials of both Respondents shall conduct a joint inspection, and thereafter, carry out demarcation on the subject property;

¶22

(ii) The joint inspection shall be carried out on 20.08.2025 at 11:30 AM while the demarcation shall be carried out within a period of two weeks from the date of the joint inspection;

¶23

(iii) The Petitioner shall be permitted to be present along with his

¶24

Signature Not Verified

¶25

Digitally Signed By:HONEY ARORA Signing Da te:0 8.08.2025 13:56:43

¶26

W.P.(C) 11589/2025 Page 2 of 3

¶27

Authorized Representative;

¶28

(iv) The demarcation of the subject property shall be conducted by following the Total Station Method [TSM] and/or other approved methods of demarcation in consonance with the practice and procedures; (v) The expenses to be incurred for the demarcation shall be paid for by the Petitioner, however, the Respondents shall ensure that the Petitioner shall not be burdened with any unnecessary expenditure.

¶29

Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 1, on instructions, submits that the demolition of the structures present on the subject property shall be carried out after the demarcation process is completed and the demarcation report is handed over to the Petitioner. The statement of learned Counsel for Respondent No.1, Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, is taken on record. Respondent No.1 is bound down by the statement made by its Counsel.

¶30

The Petition is disposed of in the aforegoing terms. The pending Application also stands closed. 11. It is however clarified that the order being passed today is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties which are left open. 12. The parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.

¶31

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

¶32

AUGUST 5, 2025/r/ha

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Digitally Signed By:HONEY ARORA Signing Da te:0 8.08.2025 13:56:43

¶35

W.P.(C) 11589/2025 Page 3 of 3

Tafseer Ahmad v. Delhi Development Authority and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tafseer Ahmad v. Delhi Development Authority and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish Kumar Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Mrs Rajlakshmi Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Staff Selection Commission & Anr. Vs Pankaj Shakya

M/S Nrs Catering Unit Vs Union of India & Ors.

Indira Menon Vs Delhi Police Licensing Department

Lt Col Samir Kumar Singh Vs Army Group Insurance Fund and Ors.

Manisha Sejwal Vs Delhi Subordinate Service Selection Board & Anr.

Samast Jawala Heri Gaon Residents Welfare Association (Regd.) Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Gian Singh Vs Sh Suresh Kumar & Ors.

Anil Kumar Vs Ekta Goel

Saurabh Sharma Vs Union of India & Anr.

Sajiya Vs Manish Heera @ Hunny and Ors.

Indo Global Social Service Society Vs Union of India & Anr.

Rakesh Seth Vs Baby Sachdev @ Reeta Sachdev & Ors.