Dalit Pichhara Varg Alpsan Kayak Vikas Samiti v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 08 Aug 2019 · 2019:DHC:7497-DB
D. N. Patel; C. Hari Shankar
W.P.(C) 10741/2016
2019:DHC:7497-DB
administrative petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL seeking inclusion of Holambi Kalan village in a government list for Gaon Sabha land transfer and development, holding that such policy decisions are not subject to judicial interference absent arbitrariness.

Full Text
Translation output
V
$-8 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date ofDecision:08.08.2019
W.P.(C) 10741/2016
DALIT PICHHARA VARG ALPSAN KAYAK VIKAS SAMITI
Petitioner
Through: Mr.Pardeep Gupta&Mr.Parinav Gupta,Advs.
VERSUS
GOVT OF NOT OF DELHI&ORS. Respondents
Through: ,Mr..Safitosh Kr.Tripathi,ASC (GNCTD)with Mr.Shashank Tiwari,Mr.Aipit
Bisht& Ms.Shivangi Singh,Advs.for R-1,R-3& R-4
Ms. Mrinalini Sen,Standing Counsel for.R-2
■CO.RAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE .
HON'BLE MR, JUSTICE C.HARI^SHANKAR -JUDGlfeNT
D,N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)
JUDGMENT

1. This so called public interest litigation lias been preferred with the following prayers:; ■ "ij Issue writ in the nature of ymt of mandamus commanding Respondent No. I and Respondent No.2 to include Gaon Sabha land of village Holambi Kalan, Delhi in list of95 villages section 35 of Delhi Panchayat Raj Act, 1954 which were released to Revenue Department of Govt. ofNCT ofDelhi; ii) Issue writ in nature of writ of mandamus commanding Respondent No.I and Respondeitt No.2 to develop the Gaon

W. p. (0 10741/201'6 Page / of[7] 2019:DHC:7497-DB r" Sabha land of village: Holambi Kalan, Delhifor providing shmashan ghat/kabristan (cremenation place), maternity hospital, play ground,- library and Panchayat Ghar for Valmiki Community etc; Hi) Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deemfitandproper;"

2. Having heard the counsel for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the petitioner is seeking for the addition ofvillage Holambi Kalan,Delhi in the list of95 villages for which J.U a policy decision has been taken by the respondents dated 25 October,2015 in exercise of powers under Section 35 ofDelhi Panchayat Raj Act, 1954 to be read with Rule 176 of Delhi Punchayat Raj Rules, 1954 as amended by Delhi Panchayat (Amendment) Rules, 2006. This notification has been issued by the Government ofNCT ofDelhi which is at Annexure P-10to the memo ofthis writ petition. For.the ready reference this notification reads as under: "In exercise ofthe powers-ii/s.35wf'DelhiPanchayatRajAct, 1954 and Rule 176 ofthe Delhi.PpnehayatRajRules, 1954 as amended by Delhi PanchayafKajffl Rules, 2006, Hon'ble Lt. Governor, Delhi is pleased to order that all the gaon Sabha lands in thefollowing revenue villages shallstand allotted/transferred to the Revenue Department, Govt. ofNCT ofDelhi en-blockfor use infutureforpublicpurposes; 0^7 SI. No. Name ofRevenue Village Name ofDistrict

1. Neb Sarai South

2. Bakkamala West

3. Baprola. West

4. Hastsal West

5. Kamruddin Nagar West

6. KiraniSuleman Nagar West ■7. Mundka ■ - ' West

8. Nangloi Jat West I' o

9. Rqjpur Khurd West

10. Tilangapur Kotla West

11. Asalapur Khawad West

12. Nawada Mqjra West

13. Nilothi West

8,578 characters total

14. Neelwal West

15. Masoodabad South-West

16. Nangli Sakrawat South-West

17. Shqfipur Ranhola South-West

18. Tajpiir Khurd South-West

19. Dhoolsiras South-West

20. Goela Khurd South-West

21. Kah'ola South-West

22. Qutah Pur South-West

23. Amberhai South-West

24. Daryapur Khurd South-West

25. Daulatpurq South-West

26. Dichaon Kalan South-West V

27. Dinarpur South-West

28. Hasanpur SouthrWest

29. Haibatpur South-West 30: Jafarpur Kalan South-West

31. Jaffarpur(Hirakunda) South-West

32. Jhalijhuli; '\L ■) ■South-West

33. KharkariJatmal ' '' • South-West

34. Kharkhari Nahar South-West

35. Kharkhari Rond South-West. 36. Khaira South-West

37. Khera Dabar South-West

38. Malikpurzer Nqj'qfagarh South-West

39. Najqfgarh South-West

40. Pindawala Kalan South-West

41. Paprawat South-West

42. Pindawala Khurd South-West

43. - Qazipur South-West

44. Rewla Khanpur South-West

45. Ro.shanpura South-West

46. Sarangpur South-West

47. Chhawla South-West

48. Shamspur Khalsa South-West

49. Surehera South-West

50. Shepur Dairy South-West

5.1. Ujwa South-West

52. Salempur Mqjra Burari Central

53. Mukandpur Central

54. Burari Central. 55. ■ Jharodamajra Central

56. Kamalpur Majra Central

57. Salahpur Mqjra North West

58. Budhanpur North West

59. Jatkhor North West

60. Chandpur North West

61. Ladpur North West

62. ' Kanjhawala North West

63. Karala North West

64. Madanpur Dabas North West

65. Mohammadpur Mdjri \■ n: North West

66. Rani Khera, ' - North West

67. Rasulpur North West

68. Ghewra North West

69. Sawda North West • 70. Bazidpur Thah''an North

71. Nany;al Thdkran ■,;." -North

72. Bawana North

73. Pooth Khurd North

74. Sultanpur Dabas, North

75. Daryapur Kalan North

76. Khera Khurd North

77. Akbarpur Majra North

78. Bhalswa Dairy/Jahqngir Puri North

79. Ibrahimpur North

80. Jindpur North

81. Kadipur North

82. Khampur North

83. Mohaddadpur Ramzanpur North

84. Mukhmelpur North

85. Nanglipuna, North W.P.(C) I074I/20I[6] Page4of[7]

86. Tiggipur North

87. Katewara North

88. Fatehpur Jat North

89. Samaypur North

90. Libaspur North

91. Seeraspur North

92. Bijapur North

93. Alipur North

94. Tikri Khurd North

95. Gadi Khasro North"

3. Thus,in the aforesaid list of95 villages,the village Holambi Kalan is not included and therefore it is prayed by the petitioner that while exercising powers under Article 226 ofthe Constitution ofIndia directions to be issued to include the village Holambi, Kalan in the policy decision which is Annexure P-10. The decision to include any particular village/villages, for transfer of Gaon Sabha lands to the Revenue Department, is purely one of policy. A writ court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, would be ill-advised:to interfere with such policy decisions, save and except where the decision is-mahifestly arbitrary or perverse. The subjective decision ofthe competent executive authority has,in such cases, to be accorded pre-eminence over that ofthe writ court, whose province is limited to that ofjudicial review.

4. No^sSg material has been pointed out by the petitioner that how they are going to be affected iftheir village is not included in the list in question. The only submission by the counsel for petitioner in this regard is that ifthis village is included in the list at Annexure P-10 then the land of the gaon sabha will get further protection otherwise there shall be encroachment. This contention is devoid ofany merit. Ifthere is any encroachment in the village Holambi Kalan, all remedies are available with the gaon sabha for W.r.(C) 10741/2016 Page5of? \s unauthroised or illegal encroachment. It is presumed by the petitioner that there shall be no remedy available with the gaon sabha ofvillage Holambi Kalan to protect its property. As and when such type ofencroachment will be there, gaon sabha ofvillage Holambi Kalan can approach the concerned court in accordance with law for the removal ofsuch encroachment.

5. Looking to the second prayer in this writ petition, it appears that this petitioner seeks development ofthe gaon sabha of village Holambi Kalan, Delhi. We find no reason to enteriain this prayer at this stage because it all depends upon the gaon sabha ofvillage Holambi Kalan asto how to develop their property. There is no restriction for the development ofthe gaon sabha Holambi Kalan. All depends upon their financial position.

6. Moreover, counter affidavit"has been filed by the respondent No.2- Delhi Development Authority. Paragraphs 3 and 13.[1] ofthe affidavit reads as under: "3. That the contents ofpara no. 3 are denied except to the extent that they are matters- of'record. It is denied that the petition involves 40 acres ofGram SabJ^q Land.It is submitted, that the present writpetition isMisdph'Ceived in law andfacts and deserves an outright dismissdlbythis Hon'ble Court. 13.[1] That the contents ofpara no.13.[1] are denied exceptto the extents that have been specifically.pdmitted.It is denied thatin spite of having 40 acres of Gram Sabha Land, residents of village Holambi Kalan are denied basic facilities like maternity hospital and cremation ground. There is thefacility ofseveral hospitals to the north and south ofthe area such as Maharaja Agrasen Hospital, Febris Multispecialty Hospital, Satyawadi Raja Harish Chandra Hospital approx.6kmsfrom Holambi Kalan and a cremation ground in Khera Kalan approx. 6 kins away. It is denied that the said land though taken under acquisition is'lying vacant under possession of en'croachers and its compensation amount Is still lying with IV.p.(C)10741/2016 Page6of[7] I I?' BDO. The possession has been taken and the compensation has been paidfor thesubjectland."

7. Thus,in view oftlie aforesaid aspects ofthe matter,there are already facilities available at village Holambi Kalan, Hence,we find no reason to give further directions to respondents to give the facilities as stated in the memo ofthe writ petition. Facilities ofthe village to be given by the gaon sabha always depend upon,,t!ie,resources of the gaon sabha and the allocation of the money from the concerned respondent authority for the development or for the infi-astructure.

8. In view of the aforesaid observation, we find no reason to entertain this writ petition,hence the same is hereby dismissed.