Sarojni Nagar Jhuggi Jhopri Vikas ... vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 22 March, 2021

[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sarojni Nagar Jhuggi Jhopri Vikas ... vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 22 March, 2021

Bench: Prathiba M. Singh

                                                            Digitally Signed By:DINESH
                                                            SINGH NAYAL
                                                            Signing Date:26.03.2021 16:03:11


$~71
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+                W.P.(C) 3796/2021
       SAROJNI NAGAR JHUGGI JHOPRI VIKAS SAMITI ..... Petitioner
                      Through: Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Mishra and Mr.
                               Shivalika, Advocates.
                               (M:9582388509)
                      versus
       GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.           ..... Respondents
                      Through: Mr. Aman Malik, Sr. Panel Counsel
                               for R-4,7,8 & 10.
                               Mr. Manoj Kumar, Mr. Geeta Das and
                               Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocate for R-5.
                               (M:8527038398)
                               Mr. Nitin Jain, Advocate for DUSIB.
       CORAM:
       JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
                ORDER

% 22.03.2021 CM APPL. 11406/2021 (for exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.

CM APPL. 11408/2021

2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed. Application is disposed of.

W.P.(C) 3796/2021 & CM APPL. 11407/2021

3. The Petitioner in the present petition is a union of the residents of various jhuggis in the Sarojni Nagar Government housing complex. The said housing complex is being removed, as the entire area is being re-developed.

4. The grievance of the Petitioner is that, firstly, electricity and water is being disconnected from the jhuggis, and secondly, that some rehabilitation ought to be provided to the Petitioners, which is not being provided.

W.P.(C) 3796/2021 Page 1 of 3

Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:26.03.2021 16:03:11

5. Insofar as electricity and water are concerned, ld. Counsel for the NBCC, appearing on advance notice, submits that the same is not disconnected at this point.

6. Insofar as the rehabilitation and relocation is concerned, ld. Counsel for the L&DO, appearing on advance notice, submits that the Petitioners are encroachers and hence are not entitled to rehabilitation and relocation. Further on the aspect of the distance of 5 k.ms. for the purpose of rehabilitation is concerned, ld. Counsel for the DUSIB relies upon the order dated 10th July, 2017, passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 9449/2016 titled Manju and ors. v. GNCTD.

7. The submission of ld. counsel for L&DO would not be valid in light of clause 2.6 of the MoU dated 25th October, 2016, entered into between the Ministry of Urban Development, Union of India, and NBCC India Ltd. for the redevelopment of Nauroji Nagar, Netaji Nagar and Sarojini Nagar GPRA colonies, New Delhi. Clause 2.6 of the said MoU reads as under:

"2.6 L&DO shall take action for relocation and rehabilitation of JJ Clusters, if any, existing in these colonies to alternative accommodations. They shall work out detailed rehabilitation and relocation plan, which may affect the progress of work, in advance."

8. As per the above clause, it is clear that the L&DO has taken upon itself, the duty of providing rehabilitation/ relocation for the jhuggis, in the areas which undergo redevelopment in respect of the said MoU. Thus, the L&DO, would have to consider the representation of the Petitioner for the purposes of relocation and rehabilitation.

9. Let counter affidavit be filed by the Respondents. The L&DO shall state on record in an affidavit as to whether there is a detailed plan for W.P.(C) 3796/2021 Page 2 of 3 Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:26.03.2021 16:03:11 relocation and rehabilitation of the Jhuggi dwellers, in terms of clause 2.6 of the MoU.

10. Let the said counter affidavit be filed within four weeks. Rejoinder, thereto, if any be filed within four weeks thereafter. In the meantime, the Petitioners' writ petition shall also be considered as representation by the Respondent. Also, if the relocation plan is already finalised or made, the same shall be communicated to counsel for the Petitioner by the L&DO.

11. It is made clear that there is no stay on the redevelopment project which has been granted by this Court.

12. List on 20th May, 2021.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J MARCH 22, 2021 dj/Ak W.P.(C) 3796/2021 Page 3 of 3

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Delhi High Court - Orders