Disposed¶36

Haseeb Khan and Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Delhi HC29 Apr 2026W.P.(C)/5933/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Demolition order SDM Badarpur Special Task Force Village Jaitpur Khasra Nos. 757 770 781 782 768 boundary walls enclosing structures dwelling units unauthorised construction restrainment order 02.04.2026 prior notice natural justice Section 3 NCT of Delhi Laws Special Provisions Second Act 2011 status quo Municipal Corporation of Delhi GNCTD W.P.(C) 5933/2026 Sanjeev Narula disposed

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of with directions: demolition pursuant to the impugned notice confined strictly to boundary walls or similar enclosing structures on Khasra Nos. 757, 770, 781 (part), 782 (part) and 768, excluding dwelling units; Petitioners at liberty to avail remedies against any action concerning dwelling units and to challenge the restrainment order dated 2nd April, 2026. ¶36

Haseeb Khan and Ors. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. — Delhi HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned demolition order is arbitrary, illegal and violative of the principles of natural justice, as no prior notice or opportunity of hearing was afforded to the Petitioners before its issuance. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

In view of the Respondents' clarification that no demolition action is proposed against dwelling units and the impugned action is confined to boundary walls and similar enclosing structures, the Court finds no ground to interdict the impugned order.

¶34

Ratio / Principle

Demolition action pursuant to the impugned notice shall remain confined strictly to boundary walls or similar enclosing structures raised on land comprised in Khasra Nos. 757, 770, 781 (part), 782 (part) and 768.

¶34

Key takeaways

The demolition action shall not extend to any structures which are in the nature of dwelling units.ratio¶34
If any action is initiated against structures which are dwelling units, the Petitioners shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies in accordance with law.ratio¶35
The Petitioners shall be at liberty to challenge the restrainment order dated 2nd April, 2026, if so advised.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Sanjeev Narula, J.) disposed of a writ petition challenging the demolition order dated 24.04.2026 (No. SDM/BDR/STF/Demolition/2026/544-549) issued by the SDM (Badarpur) as Convenor of the Special Task Force for structures at Village Jaitpur on Khasra Nos. 757, 770, 781 (part), 782 (part) and 768. Counsel for Respondent No. 2 clarified that no demolition action is proposed against dwelling units and that the action is confined to removal of boundary walls and similar enclosing structures. On that clarification, the Court found no ground to interdict the impugned order and directed that demolition remain strictly confined to boundary walls or similar enclosing structures, excluding dwelling units. Petitioners were left free to avail appropriate remedies if any action is taken against dwelling units, and to challenge the restrainment order dated 02.04.2026. The Court did not adjudicate the pleas of want of notice/natural justice or the reliance on Section 3 of the NCT of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Act, 2011.

¶1

$~134

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 5933/2026 & CM APPLs. 29171-29172/2026

¶4

HASEEB KHAN AND ORS .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Gautam Narayan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Krishna Kumar Singh, Ms. Yashaswi S.K. Chocksey and Mr. Vijay Rajput, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Shashi Pratap Singh and Ms. Laqshyaa Saluja, Advocates for R-2. Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, CGSC with Ms. Usha Jamnal, Ms. Nyasa Sharma and Mr. Ankit Khatri, Advocates for R-3.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶9

O R D E R % 29.04.2026

¶10

The present petition assails order dated 24^th April, 2026 bearing No. SDM/BDR/STF/Demolition/2026/544-549 issued by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Badarpur), District South-East, Revenue Department, GNCTD, acting as Convenor of the Special Task Force, whereby demolition of certain structures situated at Village Jaitpur, New Delhi, on land comprised in Khasra Nos. 757, 770, 781 (part), 782 (part) and 768, falling within the revenue estate of Village Jaitpur, Tehsil Kalkaji, P.O. Badarpur, New Delhi, has been directed.

¶11

Mr. Gautam Narayan, Senior Counsel for the Petitioners, inter-alia ,

¶12

W.P.(C) 5933/2026 Page 1 of 7

¶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 30/04/2026 at 13:31:43

¶15

submits that the impugned action is arbitrary, illegal and violative of the principles of natural justice. It is contended that no prior notice or opportunity of hearing was afforded to the Petitioners before issuance of the impugned demolition order. Reliance is also placed on Section 3 of the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions) Second Act, 2011, to contend that status quo in respect of existing structures is required to be maintained, and therefore, coercive action by way of demolition is impermissible.

¶16

Mr. Shashi Pratap Singh, counsel appearing for Respondent No. 2/SDM (Badarpur), has handed over across the board a compilation of documents which includes a restrainment order dated 2^nd April, 2026 issued prior to the impugned notice, as well as photographs of the site. The photographs, along with GPS-enabled location details, are relied upon to demonstrate that the structures in question are unauthorised and that the restrainment order was duly affixed at the site. A copy of the aforesaid compilation, including the restrainment order, has also been supplied to counsel for the Petitioners and is taken on record.

¶17

Mr. Singh further submits, on instructions, that although certain structures on the subject land may be in the nature of dwelling units, no demolition action under the impugned order is proposed in respect thereof. He clarifies that the impugned action is confined to removal of boundary walls and similar structures raised to enclose parcels of land comprised in the aforesaid khasra numbers.

¶18

In this regard, photographs forming part of the record, particularly at pages 78, 79, 80, 81 and 83, as also structures appearing at pages 82 and 84, on the face of it, depict structures in the nature of dwelling units. On the

¶19

W.P.(C) 5933/2026 Page 2 of 7

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

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 30/04/2026 at 13:31:43

¶22

query of the Court, Mr. Singh states that no coercive action is contemplated against such inhabited structures. Insofar as any such dwelling units are concerned, he states that appropriate action, if required, shall be taken by the competent authority, including the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, strictly in accordance with law. The statement so made is taken on record. The photographs placed on record, for the purposes of illustration, are reproduced hereunder:

¶23

W.P.(C) 5933/2026 Page 3 of 7

¶24

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 30/04/2026 at 13:31:43

¶25

W.P.(C) 5933/2026 Page 4 of 7

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 30/04/2026 at 13:31:43

¶28

W.P.(C) 5933/2026 Page 5 of 7

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 30/04/2026 at 13:31:43

¶31

W.P.(C) 5933/2026 Page 6 of 7

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 30/04/2026 at 13:31:43

¶34

In view of the aforesaid clarification, this Court finds no ground to interdict the impugned order. However, it is directed that the demolition action pursuant to the impugned notice shall remain confined strictly to boundary walls or similar enclosing structures raised on land comprised in Khasra Nos. 757, 770, 781 (part), 782 (part) and 768, and shall not extend to any structures which are in the nature of dwelling units.

¶35

It is further clarified that, in the event any action is initiated against structures which are dwelling units, the Petitioners shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies in accordance with law. It is also clarified that the Petitioners shall be at liberty to challenge the restrainment order dated 2^nd April, 2026, if so advised.

¶36

With the above direction, the present petition is disposed of.

¶37

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶38

APRIL 29, 2026 /as

¶39

W.P.(C) 5933/2026 Page 7 of 7

¶40

This is a digitally signed order.

¶41

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 30/04/2026 at 13:31:43

Haseeb Khan and Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haseeb Khan and Ors. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

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

Akhilesh Kumar Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Deenbandhu Malik Vs Union of India and Ors.

Vineet Kumar Chaudhary Vs State Bank of India

Green Fortune Communications Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 30 Delhi & Ors.

Sh. Robin Aggarwal Vs Smt. Vidya

Ali Ahmed Khan Vs Union of India & Ors.

Ariam Chatterjee Vs Union of India & Anr.

Vipan Singh Wazir Vs Oriental Bank of Commerce & Anr.

Akhilesh Kumar Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.

Vineet Kumar Chaudhary Vs State Bank of India

Niraj Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

Pallab Kumar Sarkar Vs Union of India and Anr.

Nita Verma Vs University of Delhi & Anr.

Rashmi Dua Vs Prudence School (Formerly Presidium School), through Its Chairman/Management & Ors.