R. K. Gupta vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors

These MAs have been filed in a decided matter seeking injunction against DDA, restraining DDA from taking possession of the houses of the applicants in the MA, in pursuance order of this Tribunal dated 29.03.2019 in OA No. 503/2018, R.K. Gupta v. Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Vide order dated 29.03.2019, the Tribunal considered the issue of removing encroachment around Tikri Khurd Lake, Delhi. The Tribunal sought a report from DDA about the status of encroachments and considering the said report directed the Delhi Wetland Authority to take necessary action for removing encroachment. Relevant extracts from the order are reproduced below:-

“1. The issue for consideration is restoration of Tikri Khurd Lake, Delhi by removing encroachments around the said lake.

…

Report has also been received from the DDA stating that from the perusal of “aks shijara” of village Tikri Khurd, it was found that the so called Tikri Lake did not exist in the said records. The triangular area in question is in Khasra No. 50 which is within the firni of the village abadi area. The abadi area is to be dealt with by the NCT of Delhi. The CEO, DPGS is the nodal officer for the water bodies and as per the minutes of the meeting held on 17.9.2014, wetlands were found at Khasra No. 15/9(4-16) and 30/1(4-16), 30/3(4-15), 30/4(0-9). The National Wetland Atlas of Delhi was based on mapping done through remote sensing and was not based on an on-site inspection. The stagnated water deposit in low lying land at Tikri Khurd, whereupon alleged encroachment has taken place, has not yet been recognised as a wetland in the revenue records. We may only comment that stand of the DDA does not show commitment for conserving water body and merely focusses on technicalities and shifting responsibility which attitude is not consistent with Articles 48A and 51-A (g) of the Constitution, expected from a public body. Learned Senior Counsel for the DDA travelled extra mile during arguments to emphasise that responsibility is not of DDA but of NCT, Delhi or the Wetland Authority. Certainly, DDA is not irrelevant and is expected to make positive contribution on such issues without standing on technicalities.

…

We are of the view that the Wetland Authority constituted under Rule 5(2) of the Wetlands (Conservation & Management) Rules, 2017 for the NCT Delhi must look into the matter. If any steps are required to be taken for making Wetland Authority fully functional, such steps may be taken by the Chief Secretary, Delhi. Even if it is found that the area in question is not technically a wetland, the lake is required to be preserved as a water body. The Delhi Wetlands Authority may co-opt DDA as a member of the Wetland Authority under Rule 5(3) of the Rules so that the effective joint decision can be taken to resolve the dispute whether the area falls within the jurisdiction of DDA or of Delhi Government.”

The applicant in MA 26/2022, has stated that proposed dispossession of the applicants is not justified as they are not encroachers on the lake.

We have considered the matter and heard learned Counsel for the applicant in MAs. We are unable to entertain the applications. The Tribunal has not determined the issue of identity of encroachers and required the State Wetland Authority to take action for enforcement of the wetland rules in exercise of statutory powers of the authorities. DDA has initiated action for protection of the wetland in exercise of its power. Thus, issue of identity of encroacher has not been determined by the Tribunal nor is it necessary for the Tribunal to do so.

The applications are accordingly dismissed.