Letter, Court Matter; Sub: Unplanned developments in ridge / ridge periphery in Mehrauli-Mahipalpur area: Request for hearing and for details of

(With copy to several others) with reference to DDA counsel claiming in High Court that Supreme Court had cleared the Malls project including illegal boring, to report start of work on the Malls site and request hearing, etc

Sub: Unplanned developments in ridge / ridge periphery in Mehrauli-Mahipalpur area: Request for hearing and for details of NGO application to CEC

Ref: Letter of 20.07.04 and copies of letters of 23.07.04 and 28.07.04 and proceedings in WP 8523/2004 in Hon’ble High Court and start of construction work on Malls today

Dear Sir / Madam, In our letter of 20.07.04 with reference to news reports of NGOs petitioning the Committee about Malls, etc, we had drawn attention to WP 8523/2003 and enclosed excerpts from it. Our letter of 23.07.04 to MoUD with pictures of illegal boring on Malls site and of 28.07.04 to DCP about plan to evict on 29.07.04 old communities for so-called ‘biodiversity park’ were also copied to the Committee.

Today WP 8523/2003 was listed in High Court and counsel for DDA produced an order of 08.03.04 to claim Hon’ble Supreme Court had permitted the Malls and also settled the issue of boring for it. Machines parked on Mall site (shown in letter of 23.07.04) have started excavation today. Meanwhile, old settlements were ruthlessly evicted on 29.07.04 in inclement weather for ‘biodiversity park’.

The order that DDA counsel produced (full text of which is at Annex-1) says the “Mall is on the area measuring 92 hectares of land, which has already been excluded by the order of this Court on 19th August, 1997. In that view of the matter, we do not find any merit in this petition.” Both F-Zone Plan and CGWA ban (on which WP 8523/2003 relies) were notified subsequent to said order, but neither the Supreme Court PIL (by a politician) nor the petition to the Committee (by NGOs) seem to mention encroachment of residential land by ‘biodiversity park’ calling for illegal eviction of old communities nor impossibility of development in 92 Ha without illegal boring and their movers also seem not to have taken any steps against either of these illegalities on site and their petitions, filed after WP 8523/2003, seem to be helping illegally convert the Master Plan scheme for the site (100 Ha residential and 140 Ha District Park) to a commercial scheme with ‘biodiversity park’ to help it sell-well by evicting old communities, contrary to Master Plan enforcement objective of WP 8523/2003.

Since DDA counsel did not refer to the matter before the Committee, we assume it has yet to be heard. We seek hearing by the Committee in view of WP 8523/2003 based on our representations enumerated in its Annexure-P/12, enclosed in letter of 20.07.04. We also request copies of what has been filed before the Committee in the matter and details of formalities required of us. Thanking you,

Yours sincerely

Gita Dewan Verma | MPISG Planner


Annex-1, as above, and letters of 20.07.04 (without enclosures) and 28.07.04 (tot 4p)


  • Registrar Supreme Court (with request for advice about formalities, encl all 4p as above)
  • Secy MoEF (for view on validity of declaring the area forest, wrt letter of 20.07.04, encl 2p)
  • Parties in WP 8523/2003 and others (in cont. of letter of 20.07.04 / 28.07.04, latter encl 1p)
  • SPA and MoHRD wrt ‘SPA scam’ of 2003, including about plot allotted to SPA in the 92 Ha
  • CBI wrt to key role apropos the site by DDA Commissioner (Plg) implicated in ‘DDA scam’ of 2003
  • CoA (in cont. of letters re professional complicity in ridge/riverbed violations, NGO quackery, etc)
  • Secy MoUD (as to CoA, also wrt letters forwarded by President Sectt / s.40(3) request of 05.07.04)
  • DDA Chairman (in continuation of letter of 21.07.04 requesting directions for stopping Mall/Park scheme pending compliance of judgment of 16.09.02 in WP 4978/2002 in terms of inquiry)