Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 22nd February, 2023
55/2022, 40548/2022, 43723/2022, CM APPL. 52152/2022
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. Luv Bhardwaj, Advocate (M-9990693140)
Mr. Siddharth Panda and Mr. Ritank, Advs. for SDMC. (M:9891488088)
Mr. Satish Sahai, Advocate (M-9811029493).
Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, Advocate (M-9582468918).
Mr. Akarshan Bhardwaj, Ms. Garima Anand & Mr. Nitin Panwar, Advs.
Mr. Satyam Thareja, Advocate (M-9711097019).
Mr. Ishkaran Singh, Advocate for 19 shopkeepers. (M:9582021885)
Mr. Paul Kumar Kalai and Mr. Kaoliangpov Kamei, Advs for Petitioner.
(M:8376813694).
Mr. Puneet Jain & Mr. Yogit Kamat, Advocates Dr. Charu Wali Khanna and Mr. Dharmendra Baghel, Advs. (M:9871709035)
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate for R-58(iii).
Mr. Ankur Kashyap & Mr. Aditya Panda, Advocate for R-1 (M-9971852807)
Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Mr. Harshvardhan Sharma and Mr. Ashutosh Kumar
Pandey for R-1a, b, c, d, 2 ,3, 4 & 5. (M: 9811338696)
Mr. R.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate (M: 9312710457).
Mr. Rajmangal Kumar (M: 9871211544).
Mr. Ramesh Kumar Mishra & Mr. Sandeep Pandey, Advocates.
Mr. Goonmeet Singh, Architect.
Mr. Rajeev M. Roy and Mr. P. Srinivasan, Advocates for R-1.
Mr. Rakesh Kumar, SHO.
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. On 9th September, 2022, the Court had viewed the presentations prepared in respect of the redevelopment plan of the Kalkaji Mandir by the Architect appointed by the Court- Mr. Goonmeet Singh Chauhan, as also by the Architect on behalf of Baridaars and Purjaris- Ms. Himanshi Kaushik. After perusing the plans presented by both the architects, the Court had passed the following order:
15. This Court has viewed the presentations made by both the Architects and has perused the two development plans. Some of the suggestions made by the baridaars/pujaris can also be incorporated by the Court-appointed Architect. Accordingly, it is directed that the baridaars/pujaris and their Architect - Ms. Kaushik, may work together with Mr. Chauhan and prepare a joint redevelopment plan, after taking into account the suggestions of the baridaars/pujaris and integrating the same into the redevelopment plan which has been prepared by Mr. Chauhan. The joint redevelopment plan shall be finalized in coordination with the ld. Administrator. Let the said joint redevelopment plan be placed before this Court, on the next date of hearing.
4. The Court has also perused the 10th Report of the ld. Administrator dated 11th February, 2023. The report highlights that in pursuance of the directions issued by the Court, the various meetings have been held between the Mr. Chauhan and Ms. Kaushik. Mr. Chauhan submits that he has held three meetings with the Architect - Ms. Kaushik who has put forward her views on behalf of the baridaars.
5. From the submissions made by the parties and the Report of the ld. Administrator, it appears that there would have to be some demarcation and division of the work to be executed in the Kalkaji Mandir between both the Architects. Accordingly, let the two Architects identify their respective responsibilities and place the final division of responsibilities before this Court by the next date of hearing. If the two Architects need any assistance in the resolution of any issues, they are free to meet with the ld. Administrator.
6. The meetings between the two Architects shall be held by 10th March, 2023 and any further dates as may be agreed. Thereafter, a joint proposal shall be placed by both the Architects before the Court clearly delineating their respective responsibilities.
7. Both the Architects shall remain present in Court on the next date of hearing. Use of temporary shops by the shopkeepers
8. The latest report of the ld. Administrator notes that the temporary shops have been lying vacant since November, 2022. The Report further states that a majority of the shopkeepers have expressed inability to pay the Tehbazari fixed by the Court for the small shops.
9. One last opportunity is granted by the Court to all the allottees of the various shops which have been temporarily constructed to approach the ld. Administrator and take possession of the shops after giving undertakings to deposit the Tehbazari directed by this Court.
10. In case any of the allottees does not wish to take the allotment of the shop, orders would be passed for cancellation of their allotments on the next date of hearing. This shall be the last opportunity to all the allottees to approach the ld. Administrator and to do the needful. Removal of shopkeepers from the periphery of the Mandir
11. On the last date of hearing, the Court was apprised that for the beautification of the periphery of the Kalkaji Mandir, hawkers on the periphery of the Mandir would have to be removed. Out of those, 51 street vendors stated to be registered with SDMC under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 would have to be moved to a designated place.
12. In view of the submission, the Court had issued the following direction:
8. In the meantime, SHO PS Kalkaji shall ensure that the 51 street hawkers in the periphery of the Kalkaji Mandir, registered with the SDMC, are moved to a designated area as may be identified by the SDMC. All the remaining street vendors and hawkers, whether inside or in the periphery of the Mandir, shall not be permitted to sell or hawk their wares in the Mandir. Except the said 51 vendors, for whom a designated space has to be allotted, all other vendors shall be removed. Action in this regard shall be taken within the next three days.
9. The SHO shall take action in cooperation with the officials of the SDMC and place a report on record by the next date of hearing qua the identification of the designated place and removal of the unregistered hawkers.
10. This order is being passed in order to ensure that the devotees are able to access the Mandir in an orderly fashion and they are not repeatedly accosted by vendors who keep trying to sell their wares to the devotees.
13. A status report dated 20th February, 2023 has been placed on record on behalf of GNCTD. The report states that in view of the directions issued by the Court, a joint drive has been undertaken by the Police & MCD on 17th February, 2023 in which 47 hawkers registered with MCD have been shifted to the western side of Shamshan Ghat Road, Kalkaji. The report further states that all other vendors on the Rampiao and Ring Road side have been removed and regular watch is being kept to ensure that the area is kept free from unauthorised hawkers. The relevant portion of the status report reads as under: “In compliance of the above directions, a joint drive was undertaken by local Police & MCD on 17.2.23 during which 47 hawkers registered with the MCD were shifted to western side of Shamshan Ghat road, Kalkaji alongside metro station boundary. On ring road side gate of Kalkaji Temple, one vendor namely Jai Prakash Sharma has claimed that he is protected by the orders of hon'ble Division Bench of Delhi High Court in WP (C) No. 1696/2015 and another vendor namely Asha Soni has been found in possession of a health trade license issued by MCD. Their claims are being verified by MCD for further action. All other vendors on Rampio and Ring Road side on Kalkaji Temple periphery have been removed and regular watch is being kept to ensure that the area is kept free from unauthorized hawkers. Some vendors are present on Lotus Temple side entry of the Kalkaji Temple which are not on the close periphery of the Kalkaji Temple and decision about them is yet to be taken by MCD and Ld. Administrator office.”
14. Mr. Ramesh Kumar Mishra, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of 28 street vendors submits that there is no difference between his clients and 51 street vendors stated to be recognised by the SDMC.
15. If that is the position, the said 28 street vendors, or any other vendors claiming parity with the 51 street vendors registered with the SDMC, may appear before the ld. Administrator on 5th March, 2023 (Sunday) on which date, concerned officials from the SDMC shall also clarify the position to the ld. Administrator who shall put up a report on the next date of hearing after taking all the relevant factors into consideration. Demarcation of the Mandir Premises
16. Mr. Yadav an official from the SDM office, Kalkaji submits that a tender has been floated for carrying out demarcation through a TSM agency for the survey of the premises.
17. The tender is stated to be floated on 17th February, 2023 and the same is likely to be finalised shortly. Let a specific report in respect of the demarcation be placed on record by the next date of hearing.
18. List on 15th March, 2023 at 3:30 p.m. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. FEBRUARY 22, 2023 Rahul/dj/sk