The Delhi High Court directed finalization of the Kalkaji Mandir redevelopment master plan with inclusive pujaris' inputs, ordered transparent land demarcation with DDA cooperation, and mandated inspection of unsafe structures within the Mandir premises.
Full Text
Translation output
2023:DHC:2698
FAO 36/2021 & connected matters HIGH COURT OF DELHI Date of Decision: 19th April, 2023
CS (OS) 240/2023 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 SDMC. (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.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
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. Redevelopment of Kalkaji Mandir
3. Today, 11th Report of the ld. Administrator, has been placed on record. On the issue of redevelopment, multiple meetings are stated have taken place between the ld. Administrator, the Court appointed architect, and the architect of the pujaris in respect of the redevelopment plan of the Kalkaji Mandir. On 15th March, 2023 the Court had passed the following directions in respect of division of work between the Court appointed architect and the architect of the pujaris:
“9. Mr. Chauhan and Ms. Himanshi Kaushik, both the architects are present in the Court. They submit that within a period of four weeks, they will finalise the division of work between themselves and place the same on record. 10. The division of work will be placed on record by means of a table/chart by the next date of hearing. For the said purpose, if any further meetings are required, the same shall he coordinated by the two architects; irrespective of the presence of the parties. The meetings shall be held between the architects and the final agreed plan shall be put up.”
4. As per the Report, a meeting took place between the ld. Administrator, the Court appointed architect and the pujaris’ architect, and the pujaris on 15th April, 2023 at the office of the ld. Administrator to finalize the division of work. In the said report of the ld. Administrator, a chart prepared by the Court appointed architect in respect of division of work has been placed on record at page 33 as Annexure A. A perusal of the chart and the submissions made by the parties today shows that except qua the `Concept and Approvals’ in relation to master planning, there is a broad agreement between both the architects.
5. Today, on behalf of certain pujaris the submission that has been made is that the architect on behalf of Mr. Vipul Gaur - M/s Earth Grove LLP is not representing all the pujaris. Ms. Garima Anand, ld. Counsel submits that the said 45 pujaris whom she is representing should also be permitted to give their inputs in respect of redevelopment of the Mandir.
6. The redevelopment of the Kalkaji Mandir has been pending for quite some time. From the reports of the ld. Administrator and the submissions made by ld. Counsels, it is evident that unauthorized constructions and encroachment in the Mandir premises have substantially been removed. Thus, the redevelopment process has to be started. The Court appointed Architect has already done considerable work on the redevelopment of Kalkaji Mandir and a detailed presentation was made before the Court on 2nd March, 2022 and 7th March, 2022 in respect of the same. Inputs are stated to have also been given by M/s Earthgrow LLP in respect of redevelopment of the Mandir. The repeated meetings have resulted in consensus on several issues but certain issues remain outstanding.
7. In order to bring a closure to the finalization of the redevelopment, the following directions are passed: i) Mr. Chauhan, the Court appointed architect, keeping in mind the suggestion and inputs given by M/s Earthgrow LLP, shall put his final concept of master planning before the Court on the next date of hearing. ii) The said concept of master planning shall also be circulated to M/s Earthgrow LLP as also to Ms. Garima Anand, ld. Counsel. iii) On the next date, a presentation shall be made in the Court by Mr. Chauhan and at that stage, if any of the pujaris have any inputs, the same shall be placed before the Court. The Court shall consider the said inputs and pass the final order on the concept of master planning of the Kalkaji Mandir which is to be followed for redevelopment.
8. Insofar as the remaining aspects of the division of work is concerned, once the master planning is finalized, the remaining responsibilities and the division of the same shall be directed by the Court, after affording hearing to the ld. counsels.
9. The Court appointed architect shall call the first meeting for the purposes of getting inputs from the pujaris on 24th April, 2023 at 11.30pm. Demarcation of the Land
10. As per the report of the ld. Administrator, the Office of SDM Kalkaji has informed the ld. Administrator that 2012 report prepared by Dhyani Consultants Inc. had been filed in a case titled as Nathi Ram Bhardwaj v. DDA, CS(OS) No.1235/2002. However, DDA raised objections to the same which were not adjudicated, thus, the said 2012 demarcation report is not final. In view of the same, the ld. Administrator has placed on record the following options for finalising the demarcation of Mandir premises:
“28. In view of this matter, discussions were held with the office of the SDM. Kalkaji and a meeting was also held with the SDM. Kalkaji on 15.04.2023 The office of the SDM, Kalkaji has informed the Administrator that (i) the 2012 demarcation report prepared by Dhyani Consultants Inc. in respect of Khasra Nos. 623-633, 700 and 701 had been filed in a case titled as "Nathi Ram Bhardwaj DDA & Ors. CS (OS) No. 1235 of 2002, however the DDA had raised objections to the same, which were never adjudicated, and that the said report is therefore not final; and (ii)
the village Bahapur in which the Mandir is situated has been urbanized in the year 1967, and that the said area falls within the jurisdiction of DDA, and therefore the provisions of the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954 will not apply.
29. On a conspectus of the aforesaid issues, the following options emerge:
(i) Demarcation be carried out afresh by Dhyani
8,480 characters total
(ii) Demarcation be carried out afresh by the L-2
(iii) Instead of fresh demarcation, objections to the demarcation report of 2012 may be called for and adjudicated by the concerned authority, viz. DDA with the assistance of the SDM;
11. SDM Kalkaji, Mr. J.B. Kapil who is present in Court today submits that the demarcation process is underway and is taking some time because the revenue records are very old, dating back to 1900s and in Urdu language. He further submits that the said records are being translated. He further submits that the DDA has not extended any cooperation in demarcating the land, though they are in possession of records.
12. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioners have also placed on record today certain photographs to show that fresh construction, excavation is being done in the land adjoining the Mandir by a third party to whom the said land is stated to have been leased by DDA. It is surprising that when the demarcation itself is not finalized, how the DDA has started developing the same.
13. The Court expresses enormous concern as DDA has been a party to these proceedings right from the inception and when the demarcation process is being undertaken for the redevelopment of the Mandir, suddenly, the DDA is stated to have entered into some arrangement with a third party and has started construction immediately adjoining the Mandir.
14. Mr. Birbal, ld. Counsel for DDA shall place an affidavit on record as to what kind of arrangement has been entered into with the person or entity who is carrying out the construction on the land next to the Kalkaji Mandir as also the Lotus Temple. Time is given to DDA to place on record its affidavit by 28th April, 2023.
15. Let the concerned officials of the DDA also remain present in Court on the next date of hearing to explain the situation.
16. Any documents/records which might be relevant for the demarcation process which are available with the DDA shall be provided to the SDM within one week.
17. The DDA officials shall hold a meeting with the SDM on 24th April, 2023 at 2:00 pm with all the relevant records. In the said meeting, the Petitioners are also permitted to present their part of the records, if any.
18. The Report of the ld. Administrator further notes that Salak Ram Sita Ram Dharamshala in the Mandir is in a dilapidated state which poses potential danger to the devotees. Pictures of the said Dharamshala are annexed to the 11th Report as Annexure N. The MCD is directed to inspect the said Dharamshala and file a report before this Court as to whether it needs to be repaired or it needs to be demolished.
19. List for further hearing on 2nd May, 2023 at 3.30pm.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
APRIL 19, 2023
Rahul/MR/SK
Upgrade to Pro
This feature is available on the Pro plan. Upgrade to unlock full AI summaries, PDF downloads, and more.