The Delhi High Court has found the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and its officials, including the vice chairman, guilty of willfully and deliberately disobeying judicial orders by failing to execute a conveyance deed for a plot in the name of a petitioner. The court has summoned the DDA vice chairman and deputy director (land disposal) to appear before it on August 30. In its ruling, the high court stated, “In view of the foregoing discussion, respondent no.2/ DDA and its officials are held guilty for willful and deliberate disobedience of the directions of this court and should be proceeded under Sections 117 and 128 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.”
The court has directed the DDA, through its vice chairman, to execute the conveyance deed in favour of the petitioner within four weeks. The order specifies that the DDA must bear all costs associated with the conveyance deed, including the cost of stamp papers and registration charges. Furthermore, the court has issued a notice for the officials to appear in person and explain why they should not be punished and sentenced for contempt. This case originated when the petitioner, a woman, sought the allotment of a plot initially allotted to her deceased husband. Despite full payment, the plot was later cancelled. Subsequently, another plot was allotted, but it became embroiled in litigation, prompting the petitioner to approach the high court. The court ruled in her favour, but the DDA failed to comply with the order, leading to the current contempt proceedings.
The DDA’s counsel argued that the petitioner was not entitled to the plot in Rohini’s Sector 8 because it was initially allotted under the lower/middle income group scheme, whereas the disputed plot falls under a mixed land use area. The counsel further contended that since the Rohini plot has not been auctioned, executing the conveyance deed would contravene public policy and statutory laws. However, the court dismissed these arguments, stating unequivocally that the DDA officials were guilty of civil contempt for willfully disobeying the previous judicial order. The court’s decision underscores the importance of adherence to judicial directives and the consequences of failing to comply with court orders.
The high court’s ruling has significant implications for the DDA, highlighting the necessity for government bodies to honour their legal obligations and maintain transparency in their operations. This case also underscores the judiciary’s role in upholding the rights of individuals and ensuring that public authorities are held accountable for their actions. The DDA now faces the task of executing the conveyance deed promptly and addressing the court’s concerns to avoid further legal repercussions. This ruling serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s commitment to justice and the enforcement of lawful directives, reinforcing the principle that no entity is above the law.
