Rakesh Arora v. Delhi Development Authority & Ors

O R D E R %

18.11.2025

¶1This writ petition is filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:- "a) Issue A Writ Petition Under Article 226 Of The Constitution Of India Seeking The Issuance Of A Writ Of Mandamus Or Any Other Writ/Order/Direction To Refrain The Respondents To Not Carry Out Any Illegal Demolition Of The Property Owned By The Petitioner By The Way Of Conveyance Deed Dated 04.01.2024 Executed By Delhi Development Authority (Pm-Unauthorised Colony In Delhi Awas Adhikar Yojana Cell) Thereby Conferring Absolute Ownership And Possession Of The Above Described Property Bearing Registration No. 2024/12/1/611 In Book No. I: Volume No: 5793, Page No. On Pages 127 To 136 Dated 23.02.2024 To The Petitioner.

b) Direct the respondents to Maintain status quo in the residential plot of land ad-measuring 693 .25 Sq. Mts. which comprises of House No. 31 (172 Sq. Mts.), House No. 31-A(142.86 Sq. Mts.), House No. 31-B (218.22 Sq. Mts.) and House No. 32(160. 13 Sq. Mts.) which have one floor i.e., This is a digitally signed order. W.P.(C) 3664/2024

Ground Floor Situated in unauthorized colony, Amar Colony C-Block, East Gokalpur, Delhi-110094"

¶2Affidavit in response to the writ petition has been filed by DDA in which a specific stand is taken that Conveyance Deed dated 04.01.2024 executed in favour of the Petitioner stands approved and verified upto the level of Vice Chairman, DDA on 30.10.2025. This exercise was undertaken pursuant to Meeting held on 03.03.2025, chaired by Vice Chairman, DDA, wherein it was decided to re-examine the property in question and ascertain whether the same falls within the delineated boundary. PM-UDAY Department re-examined the matter and submitted a report confirming that the case of the Petitioner conforms with the applicable PM-UDAY Policies and Conveyance Deed has been executed as per Rules and Regulations in force. It is further stated in the affidavit that while re-examining the matter, DDA has taken into account the Standard Operating Procedures, PM-UDAY Regulations, 2019 and affidavit of the Petitioner undertaking that the property in question shall be used strictly for residential purposes only and in conformity with the PM-UDAY Scheme and DDA Regulations.

¶3In light of this, learned counsel for the Petitioner does not press the writ petition.

¶4Writ petition is accordingly disposed of along with pending application.

JYOTI SINGH, J NOVEMBER 18, 2025/RW

This is a digitally signed order.

W.P.(C) 3664/2024 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3664/2024 & CM APPL. 15137/2024 RAKESH ARORA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajiv Bajaj and Mr. Naman Arora, Advocates. versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Vrinda Kapoor, Ms. Saumya Soni and Mr. Vishal Vaid, Advocates for R-1/DDA. Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Standing Counsel with Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha and Mr. Divakar Kapil, Advocates for R-3/LAC/L&B. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH