Sanmati Sabha (Regd.) v. Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

2026:DHC:7548

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of Decision: 24.08.2026

CNR No. DLHC010287352025

W.P.(C) 6231/2025

SANMATI SABHA (REGD.) ....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Amit Pushya, Adv.

versus

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Vaibhav Agnihotri, ASC, Ms. Vagmi Singh Adv., Mr. Vidit Pratap Singh Adv.
Mr. Pawan Dubey, Adv

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

JASMEET SINGH, J (ORAL)

[NyayVidhan notes: (1) The neutral citation 2026:DHC:7548 is printed as an image above the QR code on each page of the official PDF. (2) Pages 6-9 reproduce a Gazette notification as scanned images; a note in paragraph 10 marks its place. (3) Text as printed, including "Ms. Takiar, learned standing counsel for the respondent No.1" in paragraph 13 (not among the counsel listed in the cause title). The official PDF is the authoritative text.]

1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:- “A. Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing the Minutes of Meeting dated 31.12.2021 held on 27.12.2021 passed by Respondent No. 1. B. Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction directing Respondent No. 1 to allot the Plot measuring approximately 926 sq. meters, situated in A-Block, Priyadarshini Vihar, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi- 110092, in favour of the Petitioner. C. Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction directing Respondent No. 1 to regularise the structure of the Laxmi Narayan Temple and Satsang Bhawan built on the said Plot. ...”

2. The facts are that the respondent No. 1 executed a perpetual lease deed in favour of the respondent No. 3, i.e., the American Embassy Employees Co-Operative Housing Society, for developing Priyadarshini Vihar. Two blocks in Block A and Block B, were earmarked for nursery schools.

3. Subsequently, the respondent No. 3 sought allotment of land in Block A, earmarked for a nursery school, for construction of a temple.

4. On 09.06.1987, the respondent No. 1 asked the respondent No. 3 to constitute a separate religious society and apply for allotment, which the petitioner society so did on 21.01.1988.

5. Subsequently, on 17.06.1992, the respondent No. 3 again requested the respondent No. 1 to change the land use from nursery school to temple/ play ground.

6. The petitioner society, in 1991-92, illegally constructed a temple without any change of land use or sanction by the respondent No.1. Meanwhile, the respondent No. 2 also filed a writ petition seeking removal of encroachments in Priyadarshini Vihar.

7. Mr. Pushya, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the respondent No. 1, in compliance of the Order dated 16.02.2016, issued an order dated 15.03.2016, duly approving the allotment of the entire plot in question for construction of a temple and Satsang Bhavan.

8. However, on 18.12.2017, the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court in LPA 518/2016 directed respondent No. 1 to reconsider the matter of allotment afresh. In essence, the Order dated 16.02.2016 was impliedly set aside.

9. The petitioner challenges the Minutes of the Meeting which read as under:- “DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY INSTITUTIONAL LAND BRANCH A-216, 2nd Floor, Vikas Sadan, INA, New Delhi-110023 F. 8(10)87/IL/Pt./DDA/2552 Dated: 31/12/2021 Minutes of Meeting A meeting regarding unauthorized occupation of the Nursery site by American Embassy Indian Employees Co-op Housing Society Ltd. Priyadarshini Vihar, Delhi-92 was held on 27.12.2021 (Tuesday) at 12:30 PM in the chairmanship of Worthy Vice-Chairman, DDA. Following officers/officials were present in the meeting :- 1. Ld. CLA, DDA; 2. Commissioner (LD)-II, DDA; 3. Director (IL), DDA; 4. Addl. Commissioner (Plg.), DDA; 5. Dy. Dir. (IL), DDA Issues related to unauthorized occupation of the Nursery site by American Embassy Indian Employees Co-op Housing Society Ltd. Priyadarshini Vihar, Delhi-92, in the light of the order of Hon'ble High court dated 18.12.2017 in LPA No. 518/2016 titled Sanmati Sabha V/s J.K. Mittal & Ors. After detailed deliberation, following decisions were taken:- • It was concluded that the previous approval of the Authority in the meeting held on 11.03.2016 shall be null and void as the Hon'ble High court in order dated 18.12.2017 had directed that "In these circumstances we feel that the matter of allotment must be re-examined and considered afresh by the 'Authority' under the Delhi Development Act. The said consideration would be without being influenced by the earlier resolution dated 11th March 2016. Fresh consideration would be without taking into consideration the orders dated 12th & 16th Feb, 2016 which stand recalled. The decision would by on merit and as per law." • The matter was examined under the light of the directions of the Hon'ble court and the current applicable policies and Nazul Rules, 1981 and the recent Gazette Notification dated 11.03.2021, it was decided that as the disposal of the Nazul land for Socio-Cultural-Religious categories is to be done through auction, therefore the request of the society for Regularization of the Unauthorized occupation can not be considered and Authority is not competent to take decision on Regularization of land. • The above mentioned decision may be apprised to the Hon'ble Court through Panel Lawyer engage in the aforesaid case. The Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair. The above issued with the approval of Competent Authority. (Harish Chand Sharma) Dy. Director (IL) Copy to:- All concerned Copy for information to: - 1. OSD to VC, DDA 2. PS to Ld. CLA, DDA 3. PS to Commr. (LD)-II, DDA 4. PS to Director (IL), DDA 5. PS to Addl. Commissioner (Plg.), DDA Dy. Director (IL)”

10. The gazette notification relied upon in the Minutes of the Meeting read as under:- [NyayVidhan note: pages 6-9 of the official PDF reproduce, as scanned images, the Gazette of India (Extraordinary), Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), No. 127 of 11 March 2021: Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs notification G.S.R. 168(E), the Delhi Development Authority (Disposal of Developed Nazul Land) Amendment Rules, 2021, in Hindi and English. It is not transcribed here; see the PDF.]

11. It is the case of the petitioner that they are covered under Rule 5 of the Disposal of the Nazul Land Rules which permits allotment of land for religious purposes:- “5. Rules of premium for allotment of Nazul land to certain institutions. -Subject to the provision of sub-rule (2) of rule 4, the Authority may allot Nazul land to– (a) Central Government or State Government or Union territory Administration; (b) autonomous body constituted by Central Government or State Government or Union territory Administration or partly by the Central Government and partly by one or more State Governments or Union territory Administration; (c) social or charitable institutions, eligible under rule 20; (d) political organisations recognised by the Election Commission of India, or (e) local bodies, for remunerative, semi-remunerative or un-remunerative purposes, at the premia and ground rent at such rates as the Central Government may determine from time to time: Provided that use of land allotted under this rule shall be governed by the Master Plan norms, and the condition subject to which such allotment is made.”

12. Hence, the temple constructed by the petitioner needs to be regularised, and they are ready and willing to pay the costs.

13. Ms. Takiar, learned standing counsel for the respondent No.1, states that in terms of the gazette notification, the land is no longer being allotted for any purposes. In order to optimize the revenue, the respondent No. 1 has taken a policy decision to auction all the lands for health, education, socio-cultural and sports facilities.

14. She further states that the petitioner can also participate in the auction and bid for the allotment of land, even for religious purposes.

15. I find no infirmity in the stand of the respondent No.1. They have taken a policy decision to dispose of all the Nazul lands by auction. The purpose behind the same is to optimise revenue and to plan the development of NCT of Delhi.

16. The temple which has been constructed, admittedly, is without sanction and contrary to the disposal of the Nazul lands and hence is clearly an illegal structure. The same cannot be permitted to continue. The land, anyway, has been allotted for the nursery school and that purpose remains. There is no change of this use.

17. Nothing prevents the petitioner from participating in a fresh auction for any other plot for running the temple, which will be decided by respondent No. 1 in terms of their auction rules.

18. Hence the petition needs to be dismissed and is dismissed.

19. It is hereby directed that the idols will be removed from the temple by the petitioner in accordance with all respect and ceremonies, as required and needed, within 4 weeks from today.

JASMEET SINGH, J

AUGUST 24, 2026/AS

(corrected and released on 03.09.2026)