Delhi High Court: In the present petition challenging the order dated 02-07-2024 passed by the Single Judge, whereby Delhi Development Authority (‘DDA’) (respondent 1) was granted liberty to carry out further demolition as well as seeking issuance of directions to the DDA to conduct a survey of the residents of Yamuna Khadar Slum Union and identify each and every resident residing there so that they can be allotted alternative accommodation under the rehabilitation policy. A Division Bench of Manmohan, ACJ.* and Tushar Rao Gedela, J., dismissed the appeal and upheld the lower Court’s decision, emphasizing public interest and environmental concerns over the unauthorized occupation of floodplain areas critical for ecological stability and flood control in Delhi.
The Court stated that the illegal construction endangers the ecologically fragile Yamuna floodplains. Also, as the area in question had been acquired by DDA for channelization of river Yamuna, this Court is of the view that removal of the appellant-union from the said area is in public interest.
In the instant case, Yamuna Khadar Jhuggi Camp was established at Yamuna Khadar, Delhi in 1970, when the agricultural labourers working on the farms set up their jhuggi jhopri cluster which comprises of more than 2000 houses, as of today.
Counsel representing petitioner contended that on 9-10-2019, DDA, without notice, started a massive demolition at the Yamuna Khadar Jhuggi Camp located at Yamuna Khadar Delhi whereby around 500 houses were demolished. She then stated that at that stage, the underlying writ petition was filed, and an interim stay order was passed.
She emphasised that, as the slum cluster had come into existence in 1970, the appellant which was a slum union was entitled to the benefit of the Rehabilitation Policy.
Counsel for the respondent stated that the appellant-union of slum clusters was not only located at the Yamuna riverbed, but the members of the appellant-union are carrying out commercial activities at the site resulting in pollution of the river. It was later stated by the respondent that the land on which Yamuna Khadar Jhuggi Camp falls in the River Yamuna Floodplain/Riverbed which was acquired by DDA vide award dated 09-07-1992 for a public purpose, namely for the Planned Development of Delhi ‘for Channelization of River Yamuna’. DDA had taken physical possession of the said area in 1997.
The Court observed that the flood plain area is a prohibited activity zone and is an important component of a river ecosystem. Encroachment in this area leads to diversion in the flow of water leading to floods in adjacent areas. Consequently, many experts believe that floods in Delhi are man-made as they have been caused primarily due to encroachment of drains and riverbeds, thereby restricting the flow of water to Yamuna and in Yamuna.
The Court noted that, as per the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board Act, 2010 and the Delhi Slum and JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015, every JJ Dweller and every JJ Basti/cluster was not automatically entitled to alternate housing. Clause 2(a)(i) of the Delhi Slum and JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015 (Part A) clearly specifies that only that JJ Bastis which had come up prior to 01-01-2006 should not be removed/demolished without providing alternate housing. JJ Basti/cluster in question was not a notified JJ Basti as per Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (‘DUSIB’) list of 675 Notified JJ Basti’s in Delhi, which further clarifies that the residents of the appellant-union were living illegally.
It was further noted that, as per the Rehabilitation Policy of the DUSIB, to declare a group of jhuggis as ‘Jhuggi Jhopri Basti’, one of the conditions to be fulfilled was that it must be inhabited by at least 50 households, as existing on 01-01-2006, whereas the JJ Basti/Cluster in question had a tentative of 48 persons without any jhuggi numbers or specification, as filed. Further, the finding given by the Single Judge that no such JJ Cluster was existing prior to 2006 in the area in question had not been seriously disputed by reference to Google Earth Images or similar documents.
The Court later was of the view that the present appeal was bereft of any merit and the same was accordingly dismissed along with pending application.
[Yamuna Khadar Slum Union v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 4634, decided on 05-07-2024]
*Judgment authored by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner: Kawalpreet Kaur; Umesh Kumar and Nayab Gauhar, Advocates.
For Respondent: Shobhana Takiar; Kritika Gupta and Kuljeet Singh. Advocates for DDA/R-1.
Parvinder Chauhan, Standing Counsel; Mahima Anand, Advocates for DUSIB/R-2.
Karn Bhardwaj, ASC for GNTCD; Rajat Gaba, Shubham Singh, Saurabh Dahiya, Advocates for R-3 &4.
Rahul, Legal Assistant, DDA in person.