Delhi HC restrains DDA from taking coercive action against Idgah committee

New Delhi

The Delhi high court on Thursday restrained the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) from taking coercive action against the Shahi Idgah Management Committee, which is facing a recovery notice from the administrative body following its annual Ijtema congregation at the Eidgah Park near Delhi’s Sadar Bazar.

On February 11, DDA issued a notice to the committee, seeking ₹12 lakh as booking charges for the religious function organised in December 2024, on the grounds that the parkland belonged to DDA.

Justice Vikas Mahajan, however, said DDA must not take coercive action until further orders, after the committee’s counsel, Sanjoy Ghose, submitted that it filed a suit with the Delhi Waqf Tribunal, claiming that the park was on the Idgah land and seeking demarcation of the land where the Shahi Eidgah was situated. Ghose said the matter could not be heard due to lack of quorum and non-constitution of the tribunal and therefore, the committee had been rendered remediless.

“The problem is that the tribunal is not functional. Till that time, he (committee) has no remedy. It is a government land, but he is not encroaching upon it. It is a religious function, the recovery can come later on,” justice Mahajan said to DDA’s lawyer.

“Having regard to the fact that the Waqf Tribunal is not functional, it is directed that the DDA shall not take any coercive action pursuant to notice dated 11/2,” the court said in its order.

The bench also issued a notice in the Shahi Idgah Management Committee’s petition against the February 11 notice and fixed September 10 as the next date of hearing. In its petition, the committee had asserted that the park was part of the Idgah premises and DDA had no claim over it.

However, DDA’s counsel submitted that a single judge, while previously dealing with the committee’s petition against the installation of Maharani Lakshmi Bai’s statute on September 23, 2024, had given a finding that the park was DDA’s property. The counsel argued the religious function had been held on DDA land without prior approval. The committee had appealed against the single judge’s decision before the division bench, but was not granted relief, the DDA counsel told the court.

Ghose, however, contended that the single judge had no power to rule on the issue of title of the park and the division bench had left open all contentions of the parties.