Disposed¶22

Sangeeta Devi & Ors. v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

Delhi HC2 Apr 2026W.P.(C)/4236/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi HC W.P.(C) 4236/2026 (Jasmeet Singh, J., 02.04.2026), Sangeeta Devi & Ors. v. DDA & Anr.: appeals against rejection of slum rehabilitation eligibility under Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015 / DUSIB Policy, 2015; Jailorwala Bagh, Ashok Vihar Phase-II; prima facie appeal filings found; DDA Appellate Authority (DDA Rehabilitation Scheme) to decide appeals within 6 weeks; petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Direction that the Petitioners' appeals be heard and decided by the Appellate Authority expeditiously, in any case not later than 6 weeks; petition disposed of in those terms. ¶22

Sangeeta Devi & Ors. Vs Delhi Development Authority… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction that the Petitioners' appeals be heard and decided by the Appellate Authority expeditiously, in any case not later than 6 weeks; petition disposed of in those terms.

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the appeals filed by the Petitioners against the rejection of their eligibility for rehabilitation under the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015 are to be heard and decided by the Appellate Authority of DDA constituted under the DDA Rehabilitation Scheme. +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

Despite the Respondent's contention that it was unclear whether any appeal was pending, there are documents prima facie showing filings of the appeals.

¶20

Ratio / Principle

The appeals will be heard and decided by the Appellate Authority expeditiously and in any case not later than 6 weeks from the date of the order.

¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (W.P.(C) 4236/2026, High Court of Delhi, Jasmeet Singh, J., 02.04.2026) filed under Article 226 by Sangeeta Devi & Ors. (counsel: Kawalpreet Kaur) against Delhi Development Authority & Anr. (counsel: Kritika Gupta), seeking (i) consideration and decision by DDA of the appeals and representations filed against rejection of the Petitioners' eligibility for rehabilitation under the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015, (ii) opportunity of hearing and reasoned orders per the DUSIB Policy, 2015, and (iii) no dispossession or eviction from their dwellings at Jailorwala Bagh, Ashok Vihar Phase-II, Delhi until their claims are adjudicated and alternate accommodation provided. DDA counsel accepted notice but submitted it was unclear from the record whether any appeal was pending before the Appellate Authority, and objected that none of the Petitioners were in occupation and the site had been demolished — disputed by the Petitioners' counsel. The Court found documents prima facie showing filings of the appeals and directed that the appeals be heard and decided by the Appellate Authority of DDA constituted under the DDA Rehabilitation Scheme expeditiously, not later than 6 weeks; the petition was disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶1

$~66

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 4236/2026

¶4

SANGEETA DEVI & ORS. ...Petitioners

¶5

Through: Ms. Kawalpreet Kaur, Adv. versus

¶6

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Kritika Gupta, Adv. for DDA

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH O R D E R

¶9

¶10

02.04.2026

¶11

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:-

¶12

“a. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondent, DDA to consider and decide the appeals and representations filed by the Petitioners against the rejection of their eligibility for rehabilitation under the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015.

¶13

b. Direct the Respondents to grant the Petitioners an opportunity of hearing and pass reasoned orders on their claims for rehabilitation in accordance with the DUSIB Policy, 2015.

¶14

c. Direct the Respondents not to dispossess or evict the Petitioners from their respective dwellings at Jailorwala Bagh, Ashok Vihar Phase-II, Delhi until their claims for rehabilitation are adjudicated and alternate accommodation is provided in accordance with law. ...”

¶15

Ms. Kaur, learned counsel for the petitioners, states that the petitioners

¶16

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 08/04/2026 at 12:21:22

¶17

have filed their appeal and the same needs to be decided by the Appellate Authority of DDA constituted under the DDA Rehabilitation Scheme.

¶18

For the said reasons, issue notice.

¶19

Ms. Gupta, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondent No. 1/DDA and states that from the documents on record it is not clear if any appeal is pending before the Appellate Authority. She also objects to the address shown by the petitioners at Jhuggis in Jailorwala Bagh. She states that none of the petitioners are in occupation and the site has been demolished, which is disputed by Ms. Kaur, learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶20

However, there are documents prima facie showing filings of the appeals.

¶21

For the said reasons, the appeals will be heard and decided by the Appellate Authority expeditiously and in any case not later than 6 weeks from today.

¶22

The present petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶23

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶24

APRIL 2, 2026/AS

¶25

This is a digitally signed order.

¶26

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 08/04/2026 at 12:21:22

Sangeeta Devi & Ors. v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sangeeta Devi & Ors. v. Delhi Development Authority & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Gian Prakash Vs Union of India and Ors.

Shri B R Patel Ptc College Smt Sa Patel Mahila B Ed College & Anr. Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Aarush Jain Vs National Testing Agency and Anr.

Major Sangeeta Vs Union of India & Ors.

Naveen Kumar Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Muzassim Vs Unique Identification Authority of India

Kaushalendra Kumar Singh Vs Union of India & Anr.

Shashi Kumar Choudhary Vs Joint Commissioner, Cgst Appeals Ii, Delhi

Shri B R Patel Ptc College Smt Sa Patel Mahila B Ed College & Anr. Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Aarush Jain Vs National Testing Agency and Anr.

Muslim College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Shakuntla Sharma Vs DDA & Ors.

Kritika Jaiswal through Her Next Friend and Natural Father Mr. Vishal & Anr. Vs Queens Valley School & Anr.

Vandana Sharma Vs University of Delhi and Anr.