Delhi HC Refuses To Regularise Temple Built On Land Earmarked For Nursery School, Orders Removal Of Idols

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a religious society seeking regularisation of a temple and Satsang Bhawan constructed without sanction on a plot in Priyadarshini Vihar, Laxmi Nagar, holding that the structure was illegal and that the land continued to be earmarked for a nursery school, with no change of use having taken place.

Justice Jasmeet Singh was hearing a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by Sanmati Sabha (Regd.), seeking to quash the Minutes of a Meeting dated 31.12.2021 passed by the Delhi Development Authority, and for a direction to allot a plot measuring approximately 926 sq. meters in A-Block, Priyadarshini Vihar, in its favour, as also to regularise the temple and Satsang Bhawan already built on the plot.

The court noted that the DDA had executed a perpetual lease deed in favour of the American Embassy Employees Co-Operative Housing Society for developing Priyadarshini Vihar, under which two blocks had been earmarked for nursery schools. The society later sought allotment of the Block A nursery site for construction of a temple, and in 1987 the DDA asked it to constitute a separate religious body for this purpose, pursuant to which the petitioner society was formed in 1988. In 1991-92, the petitioner constructed a temple on the site without any change of land use or sanction from the DDA.

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the DDA had, by an order dated 15.03.2016, approved allotment of the entire plot for construction of the temple and Satsang Bhawan, but that this approval was rendered inoperative after a Division Bench of the High Court, in LPA 518/2016, directed the DDA on 18.12.2017 to reconsider the matter of allotment afresh. It was contended that the petitioner was covered under Rule 5 of the Delhi Development Authority (Disposal of Developed Nazul Land) Rules, 1981, which permits allotment of Nazul land to social or charitable institutions for religious purposes, and that the petitioner was accordingly entitled to regularisation on payment of costs.

The impugned Minutes of Meeting dated 31.12.2021, placed before the court, recorded that the DDA's earlier approval dated 11.03.2016 stood null and void in view of the Division Bench's directions, and that in light of the Nazul Rules and a Gazette Notification dated 11.03.2021 mandating disposal of Nazul land for socio-cultural-religious categories only through auction, the petitioner's request for regularisation of the unauthorised occupation could not be considered, the Authority not being competent to regularise such land.

Learned standing counsel for the DDA submitted that pursuant to the 2021 amendment to the Nazul Rules, land was no longer being allotted for any purpose, and that as a policy decision aimed at optimising revenue, the DDA had resolved to auction all land earmarked for health, education, socio-cultural and sports facilities, with the petitioner free to participate in such an auction and bid for allotment, including for religious purposes.

Finding no infirmity in the DDA's policy decision, the court held that the temple, admittedly constructed without sanction, was contrary to the scheme for disposal of Nazul lands and was clearly an illegal structure that could not be permitted to continue. It observed that the land remained allotted for a nursery school and that no change of this use had occurred, and that nothing prevented the petitioner from participating in a fresh auction for any other plot to run the temple, in accordance with the DDA's auction rules.

The petition was accordingly dismissed, with the court directing that the idols be removed from the temple by the petitioner, in accordance with all respect and ceremonies as required, within four weeks.

Appearances:

For the Petitioner: Mr. Amit Pushya, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Mr. Vaibhav Agnihotri, ASC, with Ms. Vagmi Singh, Mr. Vidit Pratap Singh and Mr. Pawan Dubey, Advocates.

Case Title: Sanmati Sabha (Regd.) vs. Delhi Development Authority & Ors., W.P.(C) 6231/2025