Disposed

Raj Kumar v. Union of India & Anr.

Delhi HC6 Jul 2026W.P.(C)/8721/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging an appellate order and a vacation notice, the Delhi High Court granted liberty to the petitioner to file a regularisation application for construction on disputed property. The Court directed the Delhi Cantonment Board to consider the application with a hearing and stayed coercive action pending its pendency.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file regularisation application within 4 weeks; coercive action stayed during pendency; opportunity for personal hearing directed.

Raj Kumar Vs Union of India & Anr. — Land Acquisition | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~23

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 8721/2026 with CM APPL. 40928/2026, CM APPL. 40929/2026 and CM APPL. 40930/2026

¶4

RAJ KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Shekhar Nanavaty, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Himanshi Singh, Ms. Pinki Pawar and Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocates for UoI.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL

¶8

O R D E R % 06.07.2026

¶9

The present writ petition has been filed seeking setting aside of the order dated 30^th January, 2026 passed by the Appellate Authority in an appeal under Section 340 of the Cantonments Act, 2006. The petitioner also assails the consequential vacation notice dated 18^th May, 2026 issued by the respondent no.2/Delhi Cantonment Board (DCB) and seeks protection against any coercive action.

¶10

The petitioner is in possession of the property bearing no. 6/99, Diary Area, Village Jharera, Delhi Cantt-110010 (hereinafter ‘subject property’). In terms of the aforesaid vacation notice, the petitioner has been directed to vacate the said property to carry out demolition action.

¶11

It is stated that the Appellate Authority has erred in ignoring the request for regularisation and composition as made by the petitioner in the

¶12

W.P.(C) 8721/2026

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

This is a digitally signed order.

¶15

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 08/07/2026 at 12:23:45

¶16

aforesaid appeal. It is further stated that the subject property is liable to be considered for regularisation under Section 248 of the Cantonment Act, 2006.

¶17

Counsel for the petitioner places reliance on the order dated 19^th September, 2025 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) 14590/2025 titled ‘Atul Tanwar & Anr. v. Delhi Cantonment Board’ and the order dated 25^th September, 2025 passed in W.P. (C) 14883/2025 titled ‘Deshraj v. Delhi Cantonment Board’ .

¶18

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to file an application for regularisation before the respondent no.2/DCB.

¶19

Having heard the counsel for the parties, the present writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶20

I. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an application for regularisation of the construction in the property in question, within a period of four (4) weeks from today.

¶21

II. Upon the petitioner filing the regularisation application, the same shall be considered by the respondent no.2/DCB, in accordance with law. III. At the time of considering the regularisation application of the petitioner, the petitioner shall be granted an opportunity of personal hearing.

¶22

IV. In case any directions are issued by the respondent no.2/DCB during the hearing of the application for regularisation, the said directions shall be duly complied with by the petitioner.

¶23

V. In case the petitioner files the regularisation application within a period of four (4) weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the property of the petitioner during the pendency of the

¶24

W.P.(C) 8721/2026

¶25

Page 2 of 3

¶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 08/07/2026 at 12:23:45

¶28

regularisation application.

¶29

VI. In case the petitioner is aggrieved by any orders passed by the respondent no.2/DCB in the regularisation application, the petitioner shall have the liberty to seek their remedies, in accordance with law.

¶30

Pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶31

AMIT BANSAL, J

¶32

JULY 6, 2026 Vivek/-

¶33

W.P.(C) 8721/2026

¶34

Page 3 of 3

¶35

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 08/07/2026 at 12:23:45

Raj Kumar v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Dusad & Anr. Vs Consolidation Officer-Cum-Tehsildar (Kapeshera) & Anr.

Vandana Ashok Dusad & Anr. Vs Consolidation Officer Cum Tehsildar (Kapeshera) & Anr.

M/S Global Tabbac Legacy Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Riddhi Education Trust Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

M/S Danieli Corus Bv Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Int. Tax 1(2)(2)NEW Delhi

Parivar Seva Sanstha & Anr. Vs Dte. of Income Tax & Anr.

Nazir Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi through Its Commissioner & Anr.

Ajay Kumar Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Anr.

Nitin Jain Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Smt Rajabala Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Gayatri Kohli Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Ors.

Dharmender Panwar Vs MCD & Ors.

Anil Kanodia & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Mohammad Mujeeb Ahmad & Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.