Chattar Singh v. Delhi Cantonment Board

MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL):

¶1The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the final order dated 29th July, 2025, passed by the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Western Command, Chandi Mandir, in Appeal No. 03/2024 and the Demolition Notice dated 15th October, 2025, issued by the Chief Executive Officer ("CEO"), Delhi Cantonment Board ("DCB").

¶2After some arguments, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the earlier orders passed by this Court viz. order dated 19th September, 2025, in W.P.(C) 14590/2025, titled as "Atul Tanwar & Anr. Versus Delhi Cantonment Board", and order dated 25th September, 2025, passed in W.P.(C) 14883/2025, titled as "Deshraj Versus Delhi Cantonment Board", and W.P.(C) 14884/2025, titled as "Smt. Krishna Versus Delhi Cantonment Board", to submit that similar order be

passed and that the petitioner is willing to file an application for regularization.

¶3At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-DCB submits that in the present case, the construction has been made by the petitioner on the defence land. However, appropriate orders shall be passed, as and when, such application for regularization is filed by the petitioner.

¶4Accordingly, having heard learned counsels for the parties, it is directed as follows: I. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an application for regularization of the construction in the property in question, within a period of four weeks, from today. II. Upon the petitioner filing the regularization application, the same shall be considered by the respondent-DCB, in accordance with law. III. At the time of considering the regularization application of the petitioner, the petitioner shall be granted opportunity of personal hearing. IV. In case, any directions are issued by the respondent-DCB during the hearing of the application for regularization, the said directions shall be duly complied by the petitioner. V. In case, the petitioner files the regularization application within a period of four weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the property of the petitioner, during the pendency of the regularization application. VI. If the petitioner is aggrieved by any orders passed by the respondent-DCB in the regularization application, the petitioner shall have the liberty to seek his remedies, in accordance with law.

¶5With the aforesaid directions, the present petition, along with the

pending application, is accordingly disposed of.

MINI PUSHKARNA, J NOVEMBER 17, 2025/SK

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 17th November, 2025 + W.P.(C) 17385/2025 & CM APPL. 71757/2025 CHATTAR SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajan Malhotra, Adv. (Through VC) versus DELHI CANTONMENT BOARD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Tarveen Singh Nanda, SC with Mr. Gaurav Agarwal and Mr. Nitish Dham, Advs. for R-DCB (Through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA