Full Text
Date of Decision: 13th May, 2022 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
FAO 36/2021 & CM APPLs.2914/2021, 10442/2021, 10444/2021, 20904/2021, 23819/2021, 25868/2021, 25869/2021, 25870/2021, 25884/2021, 25885/2021, 26495/2021, 29121/2021, 38063/2021, 38289/2021, 39643/2021, 43944-46/2021, 3172/2022, 3455/2022, 5641/2022, 5642/2022, 5803/2022, 5865/2022, 7745/2022, 13472/2022, 16153/2022, 17039/2022, 18207/2022, 18247/2022, 18248/2022, 21768/2022, 21801/2022, 21802/2022, 21803/2022, 22125/2022, 23093/2022
NEETA BHARDWAJ & ORS. ..... Appellants
2022:DHC:1881
Appearances:- Mr. R. K. Bhardwaj, Advocate for Appellant in FAO 36/2021.
(M:9312710547)
Mr. Kush Bhardwaj, Advocate. (M:9891074686)
Mr. Vishal Bhardwaj, Advocate. (M:9205103230)
Mr. Luv Bhardwaj, Advocate. (M:9990693140)
Mr. R.R. Singh, Advocate for Defendant in CS (OS) 648/2021.
(M:9910003491)
Ld. Administrator with Ms. Samapika Biswal and Ms. Shambhavi Kala, Advocates. (M:9818668876)
Mr. Thakur Sumit, Advocate for Defendants in CS (OS) 588/2021 & Petitioner in CM (M) 323/2021. (M:9968454481)
Mr. Kamal Kant Bhardwaj, Advocate. (M:9999438838)
Mr. Neeraj Bhardwaj, Advocate for Mr. Vipul Gaur. (M:9350271061)
Mr. Sarvesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for Plaintiffs/LRs/Defendants
(M:9350301058).
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Dubey, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajmangal Kumar, Advocate for Applicants in CM Nos.18207/2022 & 17247/2022.
(M:9871211544)
Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, Advocate for Defendant. (M:8860456420)
Mr. Kaoliangpoli Kamei and Mr. Atul Srivastav, Advocates. (M:9899754667)
Mr. Arun Birbal, Mr. Sanjay Singh, Ms. Sonia Singhani and Ms. Vidhi Gupta
Advocates for DDA. (M:9958118327)
Mr. Siddharth Panda, Standing Counsel for SDMC. (M:9891488088)
Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Advocate. (M:866910977)
Mr. Rohit K. Naagpal and Mr. Dipanshu Gaba, Advocates. (M:9873730191)
Ms. Sangeeta Bharti, Standing Counsel for DJB with Mr. Malvi Balyan, Advocate. (M:9811112863)
Mr. Nitin Jain, Mr. Vishal Chauhan, Ms. Komal Jain, Mr. Rishabh Singhal and
Ms. Kavita Singh, Advocates for Shopkeepers. (M:9716569056)
Mr. Prabhas Chandra, Advocate for D-2. (M:9871254033)
Mr. Satyam Thareja, Mr. Kritika Gupta, Mr. Prateek Singh Kundu, Advocates.
(M:9711097019)
Ms. K. Kiran, Advocate. (M:9818893995)
Mr. Anuj Chaturvedi, Advocate for DUSIB.
Mr. Kamal Mehta, Advocate.
Mr. Prashant Manchanda, ASC, GNCTD. (M:9971879203)
Mr. U.M. Tripathi, Mr. Abhishek Saxena, Advocates. (M:7011071370)
Mr. Jameel Ahemad, Advocate. (M:9810961212)
Mr. Avinash Chaurasia, Mr. P. Roy Chaudhauri and Mr. Ashish Yadav, Advocates. (M:9811841262)
Mr. Goonmeet Singh Chauhan, Architect.
Inspector Balbir Singh, SHO/Kalkaji and SI Manu Dev PS Kalkaji in person.
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.
3. Pursuant to the previous order dated 25th April, 2022 the ld. Administrator has submitted Report No.6 dated 12th May, 2022 (hereinafter “Report No.6”) and the ld. Administrator has also appeared and made submissions in respect of Report No.6. In so far as the status of the Dharamshalas and the Pujaris is concerned, the ld. Administrator has given certain recommendations in this regard.
4. Copies of this Report No.6 be released to the counsels appearing for the pujaris who were the petitioners before the Supreme Court in SLP No.9073/2022 titled Nathi Ram Bhardwaj & Ors. v. Neeta Bhardwaj & Ors. and the Division Bench in LPA No.172/2022 titled Vinayak Bhardwaj v. Neeta Bhardwaj, and all other stakeholders.
5. Further, ld. Administrator has submitted that considering the large influx of devotees on a daily basis in the Kalkaji Mandir, which is in thousands usually, and in lakhs, during Navratras, in the redevelopment plan, proper waiting halls, arrangements for drinking, food courts and spaces ought to be made available for such devotees.
6. It is further submitted by the ld. Administrator that originally the impression was that the entire Kalkaji Mandir land was about 12 to 13 acres, however, after perusing the revenue records and the demarcation report, the area of the land seems to be to the tune of 17 to 18 acres and the same is also surrounded by a substantial part of DDA land. The said land has been marked in the site plan, revised as 19th September, 2012, which is being handed over to the Court today.
7. A copy of the said site plan in digital form may be given to Mr. Arun Birbal, ld. Standing Counsel for the DDA and SDMC, and to the other counsels for the parties, who shall make their submissions in this regard on the next date.
8. Going forward, the submission of Mr. Vikas Singh, ld. Senior Counsel and Mr. Rakesh Bhardwaj, ld. Counsel, appearing for the pujaris who were the petitioners before the Supreme Court in SLP No.9073/2022 titled Nathi Ram Bhardwaj & Ors. v. Neeta Bhardwaj & Ors. and the Division Bench in LPA No.172/2022 titled Vinayak Bhardwaj v. Neeta Bhardwaj, and of various baaridars and pujaris is that they support the redevelopment of Kalkaji Mandir fully, however, in the redevelopment process, the baaridars and the pujaris ought to be allowed to participate and give their suggestions and recommendations to the ld. Administrator and the Architect. Their submission is that the role of the Pujaris and the Dharamshala occupants ought to be acknowledged and some part of the redevelopment ought to account for their interests as well.
9. In view of the submissions made by the Dharamshala occupants and the pujaris today, they are permitted to appear before the ld. Administrator at a suitable time and date fixed by the ld. Administrator in order to enable them to give their suggestions/recommendations/proposals to the ld. Administrator in respect of the redevelopment. During this meeting, it is made clear that the concerns of the ld. Administrator regarding the waiting rooms for devotees and proper arrangements of food and water, shall be kept in mind while discussing the redevelopment with pujaris and dharamshala occupants. The ld. Architect shall be present in such meetings.
10. In so far as the erection of boundary wall and redevelopment is concerned, the ld. Architect has submitted a Status Report pertaining to the construction of the temporary shops and boundary wall, as directed vide previous order dated 25th April, 2022. As per the said Status Report, the Architect has informed the Court that the contractor has been mobilized on site, on 30th April, 2022. The marking and the site cleaning work as also the leveling work is in progress. The sample precast boundary wall for the purpose of barricading, has also been shown to the Court, the length of which is to be 300 metres, and the metal sheet barricading is of 100 metres.
11. Accordingly, the ld. Architect is directed to proceed with the erection of the boundary wall and the metal barricading, and complete the same in an expeditious manner. In this respect, vide previous order dated 25th April, 2022, a sum of Rs.10 lakhs was directed to be immediately released to the ld. Architect, upto a maximum amount of Rs.25 lakhs was directed to be released to the Architect, under directions of the Administrator for the erection of temporary shops, barricading, etc. Accordingly, some amounts have been released to the Architect and he seeks release of further sums for the next phase of redevelopment. It is made clear that these payments be released to the Administrator’s account titled ‘Administrator of Sh. Kalkaji Mandir appointed by Court’ maintained in State Bank of India [Current account no.:40774972794, IFSC: SBIN0001711] so that the contractors/subcontractors can be paid directly, instead of paying the same through the Architect’s account. As and when further expenses are incurred by the Architect, the ld. Administrator, upon approving the same, may release further sums from the “Registrar General, Delhi High Court, A/c Kalkaji Mandir Fund” vide A/c No.l5530110155950 IFSC Code UCBA0001553 (hereinafter “Kalkaji Mandir Fund”), to a further maximum of Rs.20 Lakhs to the Architect/contractors/subcontractors. Thus, the total approved amount for release to the Architect, including the already released amounts, is Rs. 45 lakhs, which shall be released with the approval of the Ld. Administrator, through the Administrator’s account.
12. Mr. Zoheb Hossain, ld. Standing Counsel, to file a note on record in respect of grant of exemption to the Kalkaji Mandir Fund under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
13. Additionally, let notice be issued to BSES, by the Registry, through the ld. Standing Counsel, Mr. Sunil Fernandes [Mob. No. 9891639491] for appearance on the next date.
14. List on 20th May, 2022 at 2:30 P.M. PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUDGE MAY 13, 2022/Aman/Ms