Safiya Malik

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the removal of plant nurseries from the Yamuna floodplains, affirming the Delhi Development Authority's (DDA) authority to clear encroachments in Zone ‘O’ as per the Master Plan for Delhi-2021. The court found no legal basis for the petitioners’ claim to continue horticultural activities on government land and upheld the demolition actions undertaken by the DDA.

The petition was filed by the Harit Nurseries Welfare Association, a registered society claiming to represent horticulturists and nursery owners operating in the Yamuna Khadar area, a stretch of land between Lohe ka Pul and the DND Flyover in Delhi. The petitioners contended that they had been carrying out horticultural activities for decades and that their work significantly contributed to Delhi's environmental health by providing oxygen and countering global warming. They further argued that over 5,000 individuals, including labourers and their families, depended on these nurseries for their livelihood and would be severely impacted by their removal.

The petitioners alleged that in November 2019, the DDA conducted a demolition drive, using bulldozers and JCB machines, destroying the nurseries and uprooting thousands of plants without serving prior notice or conducting due process. They claimed that this action was taken arbitrarily and in violation of the principles of natural justice, as no proper demarcation of land had been conducted.

The petitioners relied on an earlier Supreme Court order in Baljeet Singh & Anr. v. Delhi Development Authority, which permitted horticultural activities in the Yamuna floodplains until March 31, 2020. They asserted that the DDA’s actions were contrary to this order and requested the court to direct the government to either allow them to continue their work or provide alternative land for relocation.

Additionally, the petitioners argued that the Master Plan for Delhi-2021 does not adequately account for the preservation of existing nurseries. They claimed that their operations align with environmental conservation efforts rather than being encroachments. They sought a directive for the DDA to present a rehabilitation plan if it insisted on evicting the nurseries and demanded compensation for losses suffered due to the demolition.

The Delhi High Court, after examining the petition, found that the petitioners had failed to provide any legal documentation proving their ownership or lawful occupation of the land. The judgment stated: "There is neither any description of their exact location nor any site plan. There is nothing on the record to hold them as bhumidars or asamis with respect to the large tract of land either."

The court noted that the area in question falls under Zone ‘O’ of the Master Plan for Delhi-2021, which designates it as a floodplain where all encroachments must be removed for ecological restoration. The court recorded: "The petitioners are encroachers with no legal right to continue to use and occupy the subject land for any purpose whatsoever."

The judgment stated that the DDA had been directed by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) and other authorities to remove unauthorized occupants from the floodplains in compliance with environmental protection measures. It referenced the Manoj Mishra v. Union of India case, where the NGT had stated that the Yamuna floodplains must be restored and encroachments removed. The court observed that "The floodplains of Yamuna should not be permitted for construction, occupation, habitation, etc., and it is the duty of the DDA to maintain the natural features and ecology of the Yamuna floodplains."

Further, the court dismissed the petitioners’ reliance on the Supreme Court’s order in Baljeet Singh & Anr., noting that the case dealt with farmers in designated revenue estates, which were distinct from the present case. The court recorded that "The limited concessions granted by the Supreme Court to farmers of Village Chak Chilla and surrounding areas at that point in time do not come to the rescue of the petitioners today in any manner."

The court also referred to a Division Bench’s recent judgement in Court on its own motion v. Union of India, which mandated the removal of encroachments from the Yamuna floodplains and the establishment of biodiversity parks and wetland areas. The judgment stated: "DDA in coordination with all concerned agencies is hereby directed to ensure removal of encroachments from Yamuna River Flood Plains."

Moreover, the court examined demolition reports submitted by the DDA, which detailed multiple demolition drives conducted between 2022 and 2024 to clear illegal structures, including nurseries, jhuggis, and religious structures. The court noted that "after the initial demolition action in 2019, the petitioners reoccupied the site and continued unauthorized horticultural activities, necessitating further demolition drives from 18.07.2024 to 22.07.2024."

The court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioners were encroachers with no legal right to continue occupying the floodplains. It found that the petitioners failed to provide any documentation establishing ownership, tenancy, or lawful possession of the subject land. The court stated that the land falls within Zone ‘O’ of the Master Plan for Delhi-2021, where encroachments must be removed for ecological restoration.

The judgment noted: “Any further interference in the rejuvenation and restoration efforts of the Yamuna River—whether under the guise of humanitarian or sympathetic considerations—cannot be justified.” The court further observed that the petitioners had previously been removed in 2019 but had reoccupied the site, necessitating additional demolition drives in 2024.

Additionally, the court referenced directives from the National Green Tribunal and the Division Bench in Court on its own motion v. Union of India, which mandated the removal of encroachments from the Yamuna floodplains. It held that the floodplains are designated for ecological preservation, including the development of the Mayur Nature Park, and that unauthorized occupation obstructs these public projects. Consequently, the court upheld the DDA’s actions and dismissed the petition as devoid of merit.

Case Title: Harit Nurseries Welfare Association (Regd.) & Anr. v. Delhi Development Authority & Ors.
Case Number: W.P.(C) 2687/2020
Bench: Justice Dharmesh Sharma

[Read/Download order]