New Delhi, August 30
The Delhi High Court has directed the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to respond to former Prime Minister V. P. Singh’s plea seeking to bring to book officials responsible for illegally allowing the conversion of land of a public park for construction of a club near the historic Siri Fort Wall in the Capital.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice B. C. Patel and Mr Justice A. K. Sikri told the DDA to file its reply to the fresh application by October 29.
Senior counsel K. T. S. Tulsi, representing Mr V. P. Singh, sought that either the authority should furnish the relevant records or name the guilty officials who permitted the change in land use of a public park and putting up of the structure (DDA Officers’ Club) costing Rs 5 crore in 1997 within the 100 m restrictive area of the protected monument.
Earlier, the judges were of the view that the prayer of Mr V. P. Singh’s initial petition last year stood satisfied after the Archaeological Survey of India had held the DDA club to be an illegal construction and issued a demolition notice to it.
However, Mr Tulsi contended that though the petitioner’s stand had been vindicated by the ASI finding but as per a Supreme Court ruling a probe was needed into such issues to ensure that the erring officials responsible were identified and taken to task.
He sought the same action as was being taken on the Taj corridor issue. Noting that the ASI had so far not stated or contemplated any action on the issue of the club though it was prima facie of the opinion that it was constructed in violation of law, the court directed the ASI to issue a showcause notice to the DDA and proceed as per the Zonal Master Plan for the Asian Tower
Restaurant.
On the issue of the existence of Jhankar Banquet Hall in the Siri Fort Institutional area, which was also opposed by the petition, the court said the same had been constructed prior to the central government 1992 notification creating the prohibitive (100 m) and regulative (200 m) zones around national monuments, disallowing any construction activity therein. However, construction, if any, thereafter at the banquet hall would be in violation of the law.
However, earlier this year Mr V. P. Singh filed a petition again, saying that nothing had been done in this regard by the authorities. Meanwhile, the ASI issued the demolition notice. The DDA called for dismissal of Mr V. P. Singh’s petition, saying that it stood satisfied and its continuance would prejudice the authority’s right of appeal against the ASI order. The petitioner was trying to expand the scope of the petition by adding new grounds, it said.
It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that the issue was not yet over as the guilty officials still needed to be brought to book. Thereafter, the court gave the petitioner liberty to either file a reply or a fresh application. Mr V. P. Singh chose both.
