Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 6th July, 2023
NEETA BHARDWAJ & ORS. ..... Appellants
Appearances:- Mr. Arun Birbal, Mr. Sanjay Singh & Ms. Sonia Singhania, Advocates for
DDA. (M:9958118327)
Mr. Neeraj Bhardwaj & Mr. Rahul Bhardwaj, Advocates.
Mr. Lokesh Bhardwaj, Advocate. (M:9971576388)
Mr. Kush Bhardwaj, Advocate. (M:9891074686)
Ms. Samapika Biswal and Mr. Aman Kumar Yadav, Advocates for Ld.
Administrator. (M:9406951592)
Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Amicus Mr. Luv Bhardwaj, Advocate (M-9990693140)
Mr. Siddharth Panda and Mr. Ritank, Advs. for MCD. (M:9891488088)
Mr. Thakur Sumit, Advocate.
Mr. Vishal Bhardwaj, Advocate Mr. Ishkaran Singh, Advocate for 19 shopkeepers. (M:9582021885)
Mr. Paul Kumar Kalai and Mr. Kaoliangpov Kamei, Advs for Petitioner.
(M:8376813694).
Mr Prabhas Chandra, Advocate.
Mr. R.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate (M: 9312710457).
Mr. Rajmangal Kumar (M: 9871211544).
Mr. Goonmeet Singh, Architect.
Mr. Rakesh Kumar, SHO.
Mr. Rajeev Kumar Chauhan, Advocate for Unregistered Vendors.
Ms. Himanshi Kaushik, Architect.
Mr. S. Sasibhushan, Advocate.
Mr. Sarvesh Bhardwaj, Advocate.
Mr. Vipul Gaur, Advocate.
Mr. Anuj Chaturvedi, Advocate for DUSIB (M: 9810473166).
Mr. Ramesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate.
Mr Anuroop P S, Advocate (M: 9582818838).
Mr. Aly Mirza and Mr. Parbhash Kumar, Advocates (M: 9899720945).
Mr. Aditya, Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra, Mr. Kailash Kumar Jha, Mr. Raghunath Pathak and Ms. Shivalika, Advocates (M: 8699723746).
Mr. Akarshan Bhardwaj and Ms. Garima Anand, Advs (M: 9711549953).
Mr. S. Ganesh Sr. Advocate with Mr. R.R.Kumar, Advocate (M:
9891296281).
Mr. Amit Kumar Yadav, Advocate (M: 9536654300).
Mr Rishabh Kapur, Advocate (M: 7042181838).
Mr. Manik Dogra, Mr. Saurabh Chadda, Mr. Rohit Bhagat and Mr. Dhruv Pande, Advs. (M: 9654671629).
Mr. Lalit patwari and Mr. Shadiram Dy. Director (M: 7834981916).
JUDGMENT
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. These matters pertain to the Kalkaji Mandir, which this Court has been hearing from time to time. These are part-heard matters. I.A. 9648/2023 in CS (OS)-531/2021
3. This is a fresh application moved on behalf of Ms. Vijay Laxmi and Ms. Shashi Bala under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC seeking permission to get the pooja sewa conducted at the Kalkaji Mandir during the monthly baari which is scheduled to commence from 26th August, 2023 to 25th September, 2023. Mr. Thakur Sumit, ld. Counsel, opposes the application and submits that he would like to file a reply to the application.
4. Let the reply be filed within two weeks.
5. List on 1st August, 2023 for hearing. CM APPL. 28363/2023 (u/O I Rule 10 CPC) in FAO 36/2021
6. This is an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC filed on behalf of the Bahai’ House of Worship (a.k.a. Lotus Temple), Village: Bahapur, Kalkaji, New Delhi –19. Mr. S. Ganesh, ld. Senior Counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that the interest of the Lotus Temple would be affected by the orders that may be passed by this Court. He places reliance upon the order dated 2nd May, 2023 passed by the Court and requests to be impleaded in the matter.
7. Considering the geographical proximity of the Kalkaji Mandir and the Lotus Temple as also the fact that there is a large tract of land in between these two places of worship, the Applicant is permitted to intervene in this matter so as to make submissions for the Court’s consideration.
8. The application is disposed of. CM APPL. 27386/2023 (u/o I Rule 10 CPC) & CM APPL. 27387/2023 (for vacation for stay) in FAO 36/2021
9. These are applications filed by one M/s Eswara Kamdhenu Restaurant Pvt. Ltd. which is a third-party contractor. It had entered into an agreement dated 30th December, 2022 with the DDA and was given possession of certain land proximate to the Kalkaji Mandir admeasuring 9,000 sq. meters on a license fee basis. It is the submission of the said Applicant that its interests are directly being affected by the order staying construction on the said land passed by this Court on 2nd May, 2023.
10. Without going into the averments made in the application for impleadment, on merits, since the said entity’s interest would be directly affected by the present proceedings, M/s Eswara Kamdhenu Restaurant Pvt. Ltd. is impleaded as Respondent No.29 in the present petition.
11. Amended memo of parties be filed by the Appellant within 4 weeks.
12. M/s Eswara Kamdhenu Restaurant Pvt. Ltd. has also filed an application i.e., CM APPL. 27387/2023 seeking vacation of stay granted vide order dated 2nd May, 2023 passed by the Court. Issue notice.
13. Any parties affected by the construction being carried by the Respondent No.29 are permitted to file a reply within two weeks. Rejoinder be filed within two weeks, thereafter.
14. It is submitted on behalf of the Respondent No.29 that a representation has been made by it to DDA for grant of an alternate area in lieu of the land in respect of which orders have been passed by the Court. Insofar as the said representation is concerned, it is up to the DDA to consider the same.
15. CM APPL. 27386/2023 is disposed of.
16. List CM APPL. 27387/2023 on 24th August, 2023. Demarcation
17. 11th Report of the ld. Administrator highlights the status of the demarcation exercise carried out in 2012 in respect of the land adjoining Kalkaji Mandir and the fact that it could not be finalised due to the objections raised by DDA. On 19th April, 2023, SDM, Kalkaji who was present during the hearing, informed the Court that the process of demarcation of the mandir premises is underway.
18. Today, Mr. Anil Kumar, patwari, who is present in Court, submits that a tender was floated calling for bids by agencies, for conducting demarcation as requisite staff was not available within the patwari office. In response to the tender, the following bids were received, as is recorded in the letter dated 11th April, 2023 of the SDM (CTB/HQ):
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Sl. No. Firm Name Amount in Rs. Remarks │ ├────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤ │ 1. M/s Measure Techno 2390/- L-2 │ │ Services │ │ 2. M/s N K Engineers 225000/- L-4 │ │ 3. M/s L&Q Surveys Pvt. 3000/- L-3 │ │ Ltd. │ │ Signature Not Verified │ │ FAO 36/2021 & connected matters Page 5 of 9 │ │ Digitally Signed │ │ By:RAHUL │ │ 4. M/s Dhyani Consultants 1500/- L-1 │ │ Inc. │ │ 19. The above quoted amounts are stated to be on a per acre basis. As per │ │ the above table, M/s Dhyani Consultants Inc. is the L1 bidder. However, it │ │ appears that in the past also, i.e., in 2012, the demarcation report was │ │ submitted by M/s Dhyani Consultants Inc. and the same was objected to by │ │ certain parties, including the DDA. │ │ 20. Mr. Arun Birbal, ld. Counsel for DDA submits that considering the │ │ past demarcation which has already been carried out and objections were │ │ raised thereto, some other agency may be appointed so that the said agency │ │ can take a fresh look at the issue. │ │ 21. Considering the unique facts and circumstances of this case, as also │ │ the background set out above, M/s Measure Techno Services, which is the │ │ L2 bidder, be awarded the bid for carrying out the demarcation. │ │ 22. The process of demarcation which shall be done by the said entity │ │ shall be supervised by a Committee consisting of the following members: │ │ (i) Two officials from DDA │ │ (ii) One official from MCD │ │ (iii) Two representatives of baaridars/ pujaris │ │ 23. The officials of the Revenue Department shall work with M/s │ │ Measure Techno Services for carrying out the demarcation and shall be │ │ supervised by the above Committee. The team from the Revenue │ │ Department and M/s Measure Techno Services shall jointly submit a report │ │ on a weekly basis to the ld. Administrator as to the progress in the │ │ demarcation. The entire demarcation process shall now be carried in an │ │ Signature Not Verified │ │ FAO 36/2021 & connected matters Page 6 of 9 │ └────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
24. The first meeting of the Committee with the officials from the revenue department as also the demarcation agency shall be held on 10th July, 2023. On the said date, whatever records, documents, etc. are available with the pujaris/baaridars shall be handed over to the team carrying out the demarcation, along with translations, if any.
25. First report of the demarcation shall be submitted at least two days before the next date of hearing. Redevelopment Plan
26. Status report of ld. Administrator dated 5th July, 2023 has been placed on record along with minutes of meeting dated 3rd July, 2023 which was held in the office of ld. Architect along with pujaris and, ld. Administrator, etc. Certain statements of expenses, payments, etc., have also been placed on record.
27. Mr. Goonmeet Singh Chauhan - ld. Architect appointed by the Court has demonstrated to the Court the walk through video and the PPT of the revised master plan for the redevelopment of the Kalkaji Mandir.
28. The revised master plan had also been discussed in the meeting dated 3rd July, 2023. Broadly, there is consensus on the manner in which the redevelopment should proceed. However, there are certain outstanding issues, which are still to be resolved between the parties. Accordingly, a further meeting shall be held and a final master plan for redevelopment of Kalkaji Mandir, subject to demarcation be placed before the Court on the next date of hearing.
29. The ld. Architect has informed this Court that the next steps for finalization of redevelopment plan and to commence the work would to appoint consultants (structural, landscape, MEP, environment and traffic) and discuss the implementation as also costing of project.
30. Ld. Administrator may endeavour to hold multiple meetings in order to finalize the redevelopment plan.
31. In the next meeting between the ld. Architect, pujaris, baaridars and the ld. Administrator, the proposed suggestions for consultants shall be discussed and the team which shall be involved in the redevelopment shall be finalized.
32. Let the report by the ld. Administrator in respect of the redevelopment be filed before the next date of hearing.
33. Mr. Arun Birbal submits that the sanction of the plan would have to be given by the MCD. Accordingly, insofar as the MCD is concerned, ld. Counsel for the MCD submits that he shall obtain instructions and coordinate with the ld. Counsel for the ld. Administrator in order to ensure that one or two officials of the MCD take part in the meetings for finalization of the redevelopment plan so that the finalization and sanction of the plan can be done in an expedited manner. Let the details of the MCD officials who would participate in the meetings be communicated by Mr. Panda ld. Counsel for MCD to the counsel for the Administrator. Street Vendors
34. Insofar as the issue of street vendors is concerned the affidavit of Shri Aditya Kumar, Asstt. Commissioner, Central zone on behalf of the MCD has been perused. As per paragraph 7 of the said affidavit, there are total 51 + 49 street vendors, who are verified by the MCD. Accordingly, the verified street vendors are permitted to sell their wares outside the Kalkaji Mandir premises. However, they shall not be allowed to enter into the Mandir premises in any manner. The space to be occupied by these vendors shall be designated by ld. Administrator so that the devotees are not inconvenienced outside the Kalkaji Mandir.
35. Mr. Rishabh Kapur, ld. Counsel for some of the street vendors submits that there are other vendors who have applied for MCD registration and have been granted the same by the MCD. However, their verification is underway. Let the details of the same be provided to Mr. Panda, ld. Counsel for the MCD, who shall file an affidavit on the next date of hearing.
36. Insofar as CM APPL.14509/2023 is concerned, the Applicant is permitted to intervene in this matter so as to make submissions for the Court’s consideration.
37. At this stage, ld. Counsel for the ld. Administrator submits that the work done by the contractor has been placed on record along with the status report dated 5th July, 2023. In terms thereof, let the amount of Rs.10,09,683/- be released to the concerned contractor by the ld. Administrator.
38. Ld. Administrator has raised further issues, which requires urgent consideration. In view of the same, list FAO 36/2021 on 8th August, 2023.
39. List on 24th August, 2023 for consideration of redevelopment and further proceedings.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE JULY 06, 2023 Rahul/dk/mr/kt/sk