Isabella Mariam

The High Court of Delhi, Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has strongly criticised civic agencies in the national capital for their failure to take responsibility for the redevelopment of sewage lines and storm water drains in 27 industrial areas, terming the situation as “appalling.” The Court noted that essential infrastructure such as drainage and sewage systems remained absent despite active industrial operations. It has summoned senior officials, including the Chief Secretary of Delhi, and heads of key agencies such as DSIIDC, MCD, and DPCC to assist in framing an action plan. The Bench further directed them to submit a joint report by mid-November 2025 outlining steps to address the lack of basic facilities and prevent untreated discharge into the river.

The proceedings before the Delhi High Court arose from concerns regarding the absence of basic infrastructure facilities such as sewage systems, drainage systems, and storm water drains in 27 areas of Delhi notified for industrial redevelopment. The matter was taken up by the Court on its own motion, with several government departments and civic authorities appearing as respondents, including the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), Delhi Development Authority (DDA), Delhi Jal Board (DJB), Irrigation and Flood Control Department (I&FCD), Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (DSIIDC), Public Works Department (PWD), Department of Industries, and the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC).

Also Read: Supreme Court Issues Notice on Pleas by Three Acquitted Death Row Prisoners Seeking Compensation for Wrongful Conviction; Seeks Assistance of Attorney General and Solicitor General

During earlier proceedings, the Court had directed these authorities to convene a joint meeting and prepare a comprehensive report identifying the land-owning agencies, bodies responsible for sewage and drainage management, and the existing infrastructure status in the redevelopment areas. The DPCC was further instructed to inspect industrial units in the G.T. Karnal Road Industrial Area to verify the presence and functionality of sewage connections, effluent treatment plants, and linkage to common treatment systems. The inspection was to be supervised by Local Commissioners appointed by the Court.

Subsequently, DSIIDC was required to hold a meeting with DPCC to reconcile data on the number of industrial plots and units in the Bawana and Narela industrial areas, as discrepancies were found between the figures reported by the two agencies. Reports from these bodies were awaited, while the DJB filed a status report indicating that redevelopment responsibility for the 27 areas had been handed to DSIIDC. The DSIIDC informed that three consultant architect firms had been appointed to conduct surveys and prepare redevelopment plans. However, only part of the survey work had been completed, and the reports had not been submitted to the concerned municipal authorities. The Court noted continued lack of clarity among the agencies regarding their respective roles and responsibilities for executing the redevelopment works.

The court recorded “there is no clarity as to which agency is responsible for re-development of these 27 areas where several industries are already functional.” It further stated that “basic facilities of sewage lines and storm water drains are non-existent. Connecting sewage lines to STPs and CETPs would in fact be the next step.”

The bench referred to its earlier directions and quoted that “even certain basic infrastructure facilities such as sewage system, drainage system, storm water drains etc., appear to be not fully set up in these re-development areas.” It noted that the table required to be prepared jointly by the authorities had not been submitted and that essential data remained unclear.

Regarding inspections by DPCC, the court recorded that it had earlier directed the committee “to conduct an inspection of all the industrial units in G.T. Kamal Road Industrial area” with specific parameters including nature of activity, sewage connections, linkage with local body systems, and treatment plant connectivity. The court reiterated that such information was necessary to frame a comprehensive resolution plan.

On discrepancies between DPCC and DSIIDC data concerning the number of units in Bawana and Narela, the court stated that “there is a sharp contrast between the number of industrial plots and the number of industries/units given by the DPCC and the DSIIDC… it is inexplicable as to how there can be such a contrast.”

The court further observed that despite a Cabinet decision in 2023 directing redevelopment, “till date, only survey of 17 areas is stated to have been completed, though the reports regarding the same are not submitted to MCD.” It recorded that “no report has been placed on record by the DSIIDC” and that the work of the consultant architect agencies remained pending for several areas.

The court stated that “Industries are already functioning in these areas and must be resulting in contamination of ground water and whatever water is flowing into the river without treatment. This is an extremely appalling situation.”

Given the lack of clarity and action, the court recorded that it had “no option but to direct” senior officials of various departments to remain present to assist in resolving responsibility, planning, and execution. It referred to its expectation that the Cabinet’s decision dated 22 August 2023 would be considered by these officials when convening their coordination meeting.

Also Read: Delhi High Court Upholds Dismissal Of BSF Sub-Inspector For Illicit Relationship With Colleague’s Wife; Says Such Conduct Erodes Public Confidence And No Ground For Interference Under Article 226

The court directed that “the following officials to remain present in Court on the next date of hearing,” listing the Chief Secretary of Delhi, Additional Chief Secretary of the Ministry of Industries, Managing Director of DSIIDC, Commissioner of MCD, and Secretary of DPCC. It directed these officials to “hold a meeting prior to the next date of hearing i.e., by 10th November, 2025 and submit a report by 15th November, 2025 before the Court regarding the action plan.”

“In the deliberation between the aforementioned officials, the Cabinet’s decision dated 22nd August, 2023 shall be taken note of where proper steps were directed for re-development of these areas and there has been no progress since then except appointment of three consultants. The status of the work which was handed over to these consultants is also not clear. The three consultant agencies are M/s Creative Circle, M/s SABS Architects & Engineers Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Square Designs. Representatives of these consultants shall also remain physically present in Court on the next date of hearing.”

“If no meaningful decision is placed on record… then the above said officials shall remain present in Court physically. However, if a report is filed… giving proper solutions, they are given the option to appear virtually.” The matter was listed for “Saturday, 22nd November 2025 at 10:30 am.”

Case Title: Court on Its Own Motion v. Union of India & Ors.
Neutral Citation: 2025: DHC:9492-DB
Case Number: W.P.(C) 7594/2018 & W.P.(C) 9617/2022
Bench: Justice Prathiba M. Singh; Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora