Surender Singh v. The Special Task Force & ANR.

$~73 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 14601/2025 and CM APPL. 59865/2025, CM APPL. 59866/2025 SURENDER SINGH .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vinayak Bhandari, Mr. Suresh Rana, Ms. Teesta Mishra and Mr.

Ishaan Phukan, Advocates.

versus THE SPECIAL TASK FORCE & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Manashwy Jha, Panel Counsel (Civil) for GNCTD.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

O R D E R

% 19.09.2025 1.

The petitioner, who claims to be the owner in possession of immovable property admeasuring 2 Bigha 6 Biswas comprising Khasra No. 434, Village Bhalaswa Jahangirpur, Delhi, has filed this petition seeking an order against the demolition of a boundary wall around the said property.

2.

According to Mr. Vinayak Bhandari, learned counsel for the petitioner, a notice dated 03.09.2025 was pasted on the wall of the property alleging unauthorised construction and contemplating demolition action on 23.09.2025 at 10 A.M. Although the notice refers to a restrainment order dated 25.08.2025, to which the petitioner allegedly did not respond, Mr. Bhandari submits that no prior notice or personal hearing was granted to the petitioner.

3.

According to the petitioner, the property comprises agricultural W.P.(C) 14601/2025 Page 1 of 2 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/09/2025 at 12:44:27

land and is guarded by a boundary wall in the front. Mr. Bhandari, upon instructions, states that the present petition is confined to the proposed demolition of the boundary wall. According to him, the boundary wall falls within the permissible limit of 5 feet, for which no building permission is required.

4.

Mr. Manashwy Jha, learned counsel, who appears on advance instructions, submits that the restrainment order was pasted on the wall of the property, but no response was received. He also submits that the boundary wall exceeds the permissible limit of 5 feet. 5.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the appropriate course of action in the present case is to direct a joint inspection. If the wall exceeds 5 feet, or there is any unauthorised construction on the property, the same shall be identified by way of a notice to the petitioner. The petitioner shall also be given time of 3 days to reply, and an order may be passed thereafter. 6.

Mr. Bhandari states that the petitioner will take remedial action within one week.

7.

The demolition schedule therefore be deferred until a period of at least one week after the notice is given, and may thereafter be scheduled subject to compliance with all legal and procedural formalities. 8.

The writ petition, alongwith the pending applications, is disposed of in the above terms.

PRATEEK JALAN, J SEPTEMBER 19, 2025 UK/JM/ W.P.(C) 14601/2025 Page 2 of 2 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 20/09/2025 at 12:44:27