A Pitampura eviction notice has directed residents of around 30 flats in Delhi’s NP Block to vacate their homes within 48 hours, after municipal authorities identified several buildings as dilapidated and cited safety concerns, according to a report by Jagran – New Delhi.
The notice was issued on 12 September 2026 and pasted on four buildings in the area. Residents were warned that administrative action could follow if they did not comply with the order. The short deadline has left families concerned about where they can move and how they will arrange temporary accommodation.
The affected buildings reportedly contain eight flats on each floor. The notice covers four buildings, including structures where additional flats were built on upper floors. According to the report, flats were allegedly constructed illegally on the third and fourth floors of two buildings and on the third floor of another. The report states that construction above two floors was not permitted in the area.
The buildings have a history linked to a government dispensary that operated on their ground floors until 1988. After the dispensary closed, the ground-floor sections were reportedly not maintained, and their condition deteriorated over time. The reported structural decline required the installation of several iron supports on the roof as a safety measure.
The municipal action has therefore affected not only the building identified as dilapidated but also three nearby buildings, according to the report. Residents have questioned why additional construction was allowed if the lower sections of the buildings had already been deteriorating. They have also raised questions about responsibility for the maintenance gap after the dispensary stopped operating.
One resident, identified in the report as Roopal of 130B in Pitampura’s NP Block, said she had lived there for 10 years and that six people were staying in her home. She questioned how the family could find alternative accommodation within such a short period. Residents also said they had bought the flats with their savings and feared that the consequences of the building condition and alleged unauthorised construction would fall on them.
The case highlights the immediate difficulty of enforcing building-safety orders where occupied homes are involved. The reported notice establishes a 48-hour evacuation requirement, but the source report does not provide details of an official rehabilitation plan, temporary accommodation, compensation process or structural assessment made available to residents.
The immediate next step is for residents to comply with the evacuation direction and for the authorities to determine the safety status of the affected buildings. Further official clarification is awaited on the structural reports, the alleged additional construction and arrangements, if any, for families required to leave.
