NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday asked the Centre, DDA and others to respond to a petition challenging a clause of Regulations for enabling the planned development of privately owned lands.
Issuing notice to Centre, DDA and East Delhi Municipal Corporation, a Division Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh listed the matter for further hearing on October 12.
Petitioner Rajkumar through advocates Deepanshu Choithani and Madhuri Khubwani sought to quash clause no. 3.3 of the “Regulations for enabling the planned Development of Privately Owned Lands” – published in the official gazette vide notification dated July 4, 2018, by the Delhi Development Authority, vide which regularisation of the existing structure on the un-acquired privately owned land is denied to the owners.
The petitioner said that the clause is discriminatory, arbitrary and violates the fundamental rights of the Constitution.
The petitioner further said that the clause is in the nature of putting a restraint on the overall development of Delhi as it denies the regularisation of the existing structure on the privately-owned un-acquired land despite being in accordance with unified building bye-laws and the master plan of Delhi.
“Pass/issue necessary Order(s), Writ(s) or direction(s) thereby quashing clause 3.3 of the “Regulations for enabling the planned Development of Privately Owned Lands”- published in the Official Gazette vide notification dated 04.07.2018 by the Delhi Development Authority being ultra vires of the building bye-laws, Master Plan of Delhi and Article 14, Article 19, Article 21, 300A of Constitution of India, ” read the petition.
“That the impugned clause 3.3 is also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as it discriminates between the owners of the land who does not have any structure on their land and the owners who have built something on their land. Meaning thereby it suggests that plan cannot be sanction if the already built structure is in accordance with UBBL and MPD but it can be sanctioned if the landowner demolishes that already built structure,” the petitioner said.
“And furthermore, the impugned clause is also violative of Article-19, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India,” the petitioner said.
The petitioner said that he is being aggrieved at the hands of the respondents as he is being deprived of the enjoyment of his owned property because respondents are neither acquiring the land of the petitioner nor they are sanctioning/regularising the structure on the petitioner’s land.
With the approval from the Centre, DDA, on July 4, 2018, notified “Regulations for enabling the planned Development of Privately Owned Lands.”
The petitioner told the court that the application moved by the petitioner before the respondent East Delhi Municipal Corporation for incorporation of his land in the layout plan and further for regularisation was rejected on the ground that clause 3.3 of the subject regulation does not apply to the regularisation of the already existing structure.