Delhi High Court: While hearing a batch of petitions regarding the unlawful constructions and encroachments around the Tughlakabad Fort, the Division Bench of Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ and Tushar Rao Gedela, J, held that the encroachments around the Tughlakabad Fort must be removed to ensure that the historical heritage of the country is preserved for posterity.
Thus, the Court directed constitution of a Committee to supervise the removal of encroachments at Tughlakabad Fort as well as to look into the rehabilitation of the people residing unlawfully in the area.
The present set of petitions concerns the encroachments around the Tughlakabad Fort. According to a demarcation report, there is encroachment within and outside the boundary wall of the Fort with a number of families putting up small dwelling units in the shape of shabby shanties as well as proper houses.
The Court noted that the Tughlakabad Fort is a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (‘the Act’). Section 20A of the Act delimitates an area of 100 meters extending in all directions from the protected monument to mean a ‘protected area’ and provides that construction in that area is the exclusive right of the Archaeological Officer. Furthermore, Section 20C provides that any person who owns or possesses any structure or land in regulated area and desires to carry out any construction or reconstruction or repair or renovation of such building or structure on such land, will have to make an application to the competent authority seeking permission for carrying out such construction.
In light of the same, the Court opined that the illegal encroachments and constructions must be removed to ensure that our historical heritage and ethos are preserved for posterity.
The Court further noted that the residents in the area had been residing unlawfully for a long while, probably with the connivance of authorities. Thus, the Court directed the counsel representing Central Bureau of Investigation to seek instruction from the CBI and file a detailed report within two weeks.
The Court also noted that the removal of encroachments would lead to a human problem and anticipating the same, the Court opined that the authorities of the Central Government, State Government, ASI, DDA, MCD and other related bodies should cause a survey of the area and devise a joint policy decision not only for removal of illegal encroachments and constructions but also to rehabilitate those who may be required to be uprooted and displaced.
Thus, the Court directed impleadment of Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, the GNCTD through Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and the Commissioner of Police, Delhi as necessary parties. The Court also ordered for constitution of the following committees:
-
Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Affairs, Government of India- Chairman.
-
Director General, Archaeological Survey of India-Member.
-
Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, GNCTD-Member.
-
Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Delhi-Member.
-
Commissioner, Delhi Police-Member.
-
Vice-Chairman, Delhi Development Authority-Member.
-
Divisional Commissioner, Revenue Department, GNCTD-Member.
-
Any other person/officer/body which this Committee deems fit may be co-opted.
The Court also directed that aforesaid Committee to consider various government schemes for rehabilitation including the Pradhan Mantri- Unauthorised Colonies in Delhi Awas Yojana.
The Court further stated that it reposes trust in the Committee to consider all the relevant aspects and take appropriate decision for removal of unauthorized occupants and constructions as also rehabilitation of the residents, who may be found eligible in terms of the policy decision which may be taken in this regard.
The Chairman of the Committee was directed to file an affidavit giving details of the progress by the date of next hearing, i.e., 3-12-2025.
[S.N. Bhardwaj Advocate v. Archaeological Survey of India, L.P.A. No. 168 of 2025, decided on 24-9-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Dayan Krishnan, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae), Sanjeevi Seshadri, Sukrit Seth, Shreedhar Kale, Aditya Rajgopal, Radhika Yadav, Advocates
For the Respondent: Chetan Sharma, ASG, Amit Tiwari, CGSC, Sandeep Sethi, Sacchin Poti Senior Advocates, Amit Gupta, Ayush Tanwar, Ayushi Srivastava, Arpan Narwal, R.R. Prabhat, Vinay Yadav, Shubham Sharma, Naman, Yash Wardhan Sharma, Kanika Agnihotri, Anupam Varma, Nikhil Sharma, S. Akshata, , Diwakar Bidhuri, Vinod Bidhuri, Fardeen Khan, Ashna, S. Shreya, Krishna, Dushyant Bariya, Shashank Rishabh Rana, Shiva Lakshmi, Madhav Bajaj, Katyayani Joshi, Esha Kumar, Sanjay Katyal, Ritika Bansal, Anand Prakash, Varsha Arya, Satbeer, Sanjay, Advocates