Disposed¶32

Al Madina Masjid v. Religious Committee & Ors.

Delhi HC16 Jan 2026W.P.(C)/10041/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Al Madina Masjid v. Religious Committee & Ors.; W.P.(C) 10041/2025; CM APPL. 41762/2025; CM APPL. 55619/2025; High Court of Delhi; Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav; order dated 16.01.2026; unauthorised religious structure / mosque removal; Religious Committee order dated 22.11.2024; MCD demolition executed 21.07.2025; encroachment on public land; DUSIB Flat No. 301, A-Block, New Ranjeet Nagar, Ward No. 87 KBZ; police force requisition 15.07.2025; structure erected after 2015; obstruction of public path; remedy in civil proceedings; petition disposed of along with pending applications; Advisory Board meeting under COFEPOSA; Kuldeep Gola Adv.; Kapil Dutta Standing Counsel MCD; Syed Abdul Haseeb CGSC.

What did the court decide?

The petition, along with pending applications, stands disposed of. ¶32

Al Madina Masjid Vs Religious Committee & Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Disposed

¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition challenging the Religious Committee's removal direction remained live for adjudication when the demolition/removal directed by the Religious Committee had already been scheduled and carried out on 21.07.2025. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

The petition, along with pending applications, stands disposed of.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner has any grievance with respect to the structure having been made prior in time, it will have to be gone into under appropriate civil proceedings upon the petitioner taking the necessary remedy; this aspect cannot be adequately adjudicated in the writ petition at this stage.

¶31

Key takeaways

The Court noted that there are findings of facts recorded by the Religious Committee stating that the structure in question was erected after 2015 (per the Committee's minutes, no documentary proof of earlier existence was provided by anyone).obiter¶25
During the course of hearing the Court saw the photograph of the structure in question, which indicated that it was obstructing the public path and did not seem to be an old structure.obiter¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Delhi (Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J), order dated 16.01.2026 in W.P.(C) 10041/2025 — AL MADINA MASJID v. RELIGIOUS COMMITTEE & ORS. The petitioner had challenged the Religious Committee's order/minutes dated 22.11.2024 directing MCD to remove an unauthorised religious structure (mosque/masjid) near DUSIB Flat No. 301, A-Block, New Ranjeet Nagar, Ward No. 87, KBZ. By the date of hearing, MCD had executed the removal on 21.07.2025 pursuant to the Committee's directions, following inter-departmental communications: MCD's letter of 08.10.2024 reporting the structure; a police letter (receipt 02.06.2025) noting the structure blocked a twenty-foot-wide lane and offering force; DUSIB's communication of 10/07/2025 assigning the action to MCD; and the Assistant Engineer's 15.07.2025 requisition for police force. Per the MCD status report, the matter listed on 21.07.2025 could not be heard (Advisory Board meeting under COFEPOSA) and no stay was in force when the removal occurred. The Court noted the Religious Committee's recorded factual finding that the structure was erected after 2015 with no documentary proof of earlier existence, and that photographs showed the structure obstructing the public path and not appearing old. Holding that any grievance as to the structure's prior existence must be pursued in appropriate civil proceedings and could not be adequately adjudicated in the writ petition at that stage, the Court disposed of the petition along with pending applications.

¶1

$~35

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 10041/2025 and CM APPL. 41762/2025, CM APPL. 55619/2025

¶4

AL MADINA MASJID .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Kuldeep Gola, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

RELIGIOUS COMMITTEE & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Kapil Dutta, Standing Counsel for MCD. Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb, CGSC for R-2.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV O R D E R % 16.01.2026

¶10

The status report has been presented by the respondent – Municipal Corporation Delhi (‘MCD’) which inter alia states that pursuant to the decision taken by the Religious Committee, the Corporation has taken the action to its logical conclusion. The demolition drive was scheduled on 21.07.2025 and removal has already taken place.

¶11

Various circumstances have been explained in the status report filed by the respondent- MCD. Pragraph no. 8 onwards justify the bona fides on the part of the respondent authorities. For the sake of clarity, paragraph no. 8 to 14 are extracted as under:

¶12

“ 8. That vide Letter dated 08.10.2024, the Respondent Corporation informed the Religious Committee about the existence of a structure in

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 13:10:10

¶15

shape of mosque/masjid situated near DUSIB Flat No. 301, A-Block, New Ranjeet Nagar, Ward No. 87, KBZ in the prescribed format as desired by the Religious Committee. The copy of the letter dated 08.10.2024 are annexed herewith as Annexure-D).

¶16

9. That on 22.11.2024, the Religious Committee/Respondent No. 1 herein passed the impugned order which is under challenge in the present Writ Petition wherein a specific direction was given to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi to remove the encroachment/unauthorised Religious structure at it’s own level. Further, it was also observed by the Committee that the removal of this encroachment is crucial to restore unhindered public access and ensure safety for all. The copy of the Minutes of the Meeting of the Religious Committee is annexed herewith as Annexure- E.

¶17

10.That subsequently, a letter was received from the office of Asst. Commissioner of Police, Sub-Division Patel Nagar, Delhi on 02.06.2025 stating that the structure is built in a twenty feet vide gali that is blocking the vehicular movement and further stating that the local police is ready to provide adequate force and logistics as and when required for the removal of the structure. The copy of the letter dated 30.05.2025 is annexed herewith as Annexure-F.

¶18

11.That further it would be relevant to note here that on 10/07/2025 a communication was forwarded from Executive Engineer, C-10 of Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board to Assistant Commissioner of Police, copy of the same was also forwarded to the office of the Respondent Corporation, which stated that all the services and building activities, i.e. unauthorised construction and encroachment on service area pertains to MCD and any action in the matter may be taken by MCD. The copy of the letter dated 11.07.2025 is annexed herewith as Annexure-G.

¶19

12. That it would not be out of place to mention here that the concerned Assistant Engineer, M-II, Karol Bagh Zone on 15.07.2025 sent an intimation to the SHO, Ps Ranjit Nagar for providing of adequate Police Force along with the lady police for removal of encroachment on MCD land. The copy of the letter dated 15.07.2025 is annexed herewith as Annexure-H.

¶20

13.That pursuant to the requisition and letter dated 15.07.2025, the adequate police force was provided to the officers of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi on 21.07.2025 and the requisite action for removal of encroachment was carried out from the site in question. The officers of the Respondent Corporation were also conscious of the fact about the pendency of the present Writ Petition as the matter was listed on 16.07.2025 when the matter was simply adjourned for 21.07.2025. The Petitioner on 16.07.2025, when the matter was adjourned for 21.07.2025 was conscious of the fact that the Respondent Corporation is contemplating an action 21.07.2025 but the said fact was never brought to

¶21

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 13:10:10

¶22

the notice of this Hon’ble Court and the matter was simply adjourned to 21.07.2025. The bare perusal of the order dated 21.07.2025 would also indicate that this Hon’ble Court did not even issue the notices in the present Writ Petition.

¶23

On 21.07.2025, when the matter was listed before this Hon’ble Court, the matter could not be taken up for hearing as the Court was busy in the Advisory Board meeting under COFEPOSA. Had it been the case that the Petitioner was vigilant and it was in the knowledge of the Petitioner that the encroachment removal action was planned for 21.07.2025, the Petitioner ought to have mentioned the matter and got the same listed before some other bench. Again, it would be worth mentioning that the officers of the Respondent Corporation waited at the site till 11:30 AM and it was only after the matter was adjourned, the said encroachment removal action was taken by the officers of the Respondent Corporation and also considering the fact there is no stay or restraining order at the time of execution of removal of encroachment from the existing site. The photographs of site (Before and after) are annexed herewith as AnnexureI.

¶24

14.That today it does not lie into the mouth of the Petition that the Respondent should have waited for the decision/outcome of the present proceedings when in fact there are categorical directions of the Religious Committee dated 22.11.2024 to take action against the encroachment on public land. The Petitioner today cannot blame the Corporation when he himself chose to not to get the matter transferred to some other bench on 21.07.2025.”

¶25

Even otherwise, there are findings of facts which have been recorded by the Religious Committee which states that the structure in question was erected after 2015. Paragraph no. 2.2 of the minutes of the meeting of the Religious Committee dated 22.11.2024, is extracted as under:

¶26

“2.2 The representative of Delhi Police has stated that that mosque namely “Al-Madina” has been situated near DUSIB, Flat No. 301, A- Block, New Ranjeet Nagar, Delhi in ward No. 87/KBZ since 2015, though no documentary proof of existence was provided by anyone and as per available information there is no court case is pending regarding the said land. They further stated in the requisite police force will be provided as and when required. ”

¶27

During the course of hearing, the Court has also seen the photograph of the structure in question which clearly indicates that the same was

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 13:10:10

¶30

obstructing the public path and does not seem to be an old structure.

¶31

In any case, if the petitioner has any grievance with respect to the structure having been made prior in the time, the same perhaps will have to be gone into under appropriate civil proceedings upon petitioner’s taking necessary remedy. In this writ petition, the aforesaid aspect, at this stage, cannot be adequately adjudicated.

¶32

Under these circumstances, the petition, along with pending applications, stands disposed of.

¶33

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J

¶34

JANUARY 16, 2026 aks/ap

¶35

This is a digitally signed order.

¶36

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 19/01/2026 at 13:10:10

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order/minutes of meeting of the Religious Committee dated 22.11.2024 specifically directing the Municipal Corporation of Delhi to remove the encroachment/unauthorised religious structure (mosque/masjid near DUSIB Flat No. 301, A-Block, New Ranjeet Nagar, Ward No. 87, KBZ) at its own level, observing that removal was crucial to restore unhindered public access and safety; this order is under challenge in the present writ petition.¶16
Religious Committee (Respondent No. 1) · 22.11.2024
Prior proceeding
By letter dated 08.10.2024 the Respondent Corporation (MCD) informed the Religious Committee of the existence of a structure in the shape of a mosque/masjid near DUSIB Flat No. 301, A-Block, New Ranjeet Nagar, Ward No. 87, KBZ, in the prescribed format (annexed as Annexure-D).¶15
Prior proceeding
Letter received on 02.06.2025 from the office of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sub-Division Patel Nagar, Delhi, stating the structure was built in a twenty-foot-wide lane (printed as 'twenty feet vide gali') blocking vehicular movement, and that local police would provide adequate force and logistics as required (letter dated 30.05.2025 annexed as Annexure-F).¶17
Prior proceeding
Communication dated 10/07/2025 forwarded from Executive Engineer, C-10, Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board to the Assistant Commissioner of Police (copy to MCD), stating that all services and building activities, i.e. unauthorised construction and encroachment on service area, pertain to MCD and any action may be taken by MCD (letter dated 11.07.2025 annexed as Annexure-G).¶18
Prior proceeding
Intimation sent on 15.07.2025 by the concerned Assistant Engineer, M-II, Karol Bagh Zone to the SHO, PS Ranjit Nagar seeking provision of adequate police force, along with lady police, for removal of encroachment on MCD land (letter annexed as Annexure-H).¶19
Prior proceeding
Pursuant to the requisition/letter dated 15.07.2025, adequate police force was provided to MCD officers on 21.07.2025 and the requisite removal of the encroachment was carried out from the site; per the status report, no stay or restraining order was in force at the time of execution and site photographs (before/after) were annexed as Annexure-I.¶20
Prior proceeding
As stated in MCD's status report: when the matter was listed on 21.07.2025 it could not be taken up for hearing as the Court was busy in an Advisory Board meeting under COFEPOSA; the Corporation officers waited at the site till 11:30 AM and the removal action was taken after the matter stood adjourned, with no stay or restraining order then existing.¶23

Al Madina Masjid v. Religious Committee & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Al Madina Masjid v. Religious Committee & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anuradha Biswakarma Vs National Medical Commission & Ors.

Aecom Technical Services Inc. Vs Income-Tax Officer Ward Int Tax 1(1)(1), Delhi & Ors.

Rita Pillai Vs Payal Dewangana

Rajeev Ranjan Vederah Vs Reserve Bank of India and Anr.

Vivek Mukherji Vs Union of India & Anr.

Smt Prabhawati Shukla Vs Iifl Home Finance Ltd. & Ors.

Smt Geeta Devi Vs Iifl Home Finance Ltd. & Ors.

Kushagra Sharma and Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Rita Pillai Vs Payal Dewangana

Vikas Jaiswal Vs Central Information Commission

Raj Kumar Sharma Shandilya Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Shivani Varma Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

M/S Kanti Prashad Mittal Vs Union of India through Ministry of Road, Transport and Highways through Govt. of Assam, PWD

M/S Prachi Infra and Roads Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.