Delhi High Court
Anil Bhargav vs The Honble Vice Chairman, Dda & Anr on 23 October, 2019
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 23rd October, 2019
+ W.P.(C) 9662/2017
ANIL BHARGAV ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Pooja Kumari and Ms. Pooja
Verma, Advs.
versus
THE HONBLE VICE CHAIRMAN,
DDA & ANR ....Respondents
Through: Mr. Arjun Pant, Adv. for DDA
Mr. Bhagwan Swarup Shukla,
CGSC with Mr. Mukesh Pandey,
Adv. for respondent no. 2
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
ORDER
% 23.10.2019
D.N. PATEL, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL)
1. This Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been preferred with the
following prayers:-
"i. Immediately repair and carry out maintenance
to preserve this Historical Monument i.e. SHEESH
MAHAL situated at Shalimar Bagh;
ii. Modify the order dated 14.07.2016 stopping the
tenders passed by the respondent no. 1 to restart
the auction of Orchards on annual basis for
collecting the fruits from the trees with the entry of
citizen in to the Orchards;
iii. To make provisions for adequate security of the
citizen in the park/garden/orchards to restrain
rampant gambling and betting;
iv. To make adequate arrangements of maintenance
of Parks, Garden and Orchards;
v. To make adequate provisions to immediately
stop illegal parking of vehicles in the Orchards;
vi. To immediate stop the encroachers
encroaching the area of Orchards;
vii. To immediate restrain Illegal uprooting,
cutting of tree(s) and setting ablaze trees;
viii. Pass any other order/orders which this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances stated above in the interest of
justice and equity."
2. Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the
additional affidavit filed by respondent no. 1 dated 12 th July, 2019,
especially paragraph 3 thereof, which reads as under:-
"3. This Hon'ble Court vide order dated
01.10.2018 directed as follows:-
"As a matter of last indulgence two weeks time is
granted to the respondent / Archaeological Survey
of India to file their counter-affidavit and response
to the status report filed by respondent / DDA.
DDA to further indicate to us as to whether the
tender notice issued vide Annexure-A &B to their
status report dated 19th September, 2018 has been
finalised; whether the contract has been awarded;
and what is the position with regard to the
construction of the wall in question. That part,
DDA should also indicate to us as to what action
has been taken by them in compliance with the
directions passed by this Court on 13th February,
2018 in Para 7." Hence the present additional
affidavit is being filed in compliance with the
directions dated 13.02.2018 and 01.10.2018.
3. It is submitted that the E-tender for
engagement of private security guards for watch
and wards was finalized and the same was
awarded to M/s. Gaurav Enterprises on
10.09.2018. M/s Gaurav Enterprises has been
awarded for deployment of 72 nos. of private
security guard (without gun) per month in proper
uniform for watch & ward to prevent theft/damage
of materials including street furniture, M.S. grill
fencing, plants, lawn etc. and prevent the incident
in lake wildlife birds also, prevent of unauthorized
encroachment and any other mishappening with
walkers/visitors of the area in three shifts (first
shift 9.00 AM to 5.00 PM, second shift from 5.00
PM to 1.00 AM and third shift from 1.00 AM to
9.00 AM) as per direction of Engineer-in-Chief.
Security guards have been deployed for security
under scrutiny due to finalization of the location
plan/determination of site boundaries for the
construction of RCC wall as there is a proposal
already underway to pass a Master Plan Road 30
M R/W through Sheesh Mahal Park due to which
boundaries of the Park are likely to be altered. The
matter is vigourously being pursued in order Of
the area as per directions. A copy of the
award/letter dated 10.09.2018 is annexed hereto
and marked as ANNEXURE-1"
3. In view of the aforesaid action initiated by the respondent no. 1, it
appears that the tender for deploying Security Guard for watch and ward
of the monuments in question has been floated by the respondent no. 1.
The tender has already been finalized and 72 Security Guards have been
deployed at the monument, who are working in three shifts. Moreover, as
stated in paragraph 4 of the aforesaid additional affidavit, it also appears
that a decision has already been taken by the respondent no. 1 to raise
boundary walls for protection of the monument in question. Thus,
respondent no. 1 has already taken necessary action for deployment of
security in the monument in question for its protection.
4. Moreover, looking to the counter affidavit filed by the respondent
no. 2 dated 7th December, 2018, it appears that there was an expenditure
of ₹4,82,358/- in the year 2016-17 for repairing of the Sheesh Mahal
monument. Similarly, expenditure has also been incurred by respondent
no. 2 to the tune of ₹7,31,917/- in the year 2017-18 for repairing of the
monument in question.
5. Thus, for the Sheesh Mahal, New Delhi, the respondent nos. 1 and
2 have already taken adequate actions as stated hereinabove. Nonetheless,
we hereby direct the respondents to continue to protect the monument
referred to in the memo of this writ petition in accordance with law, rules,
regulations and Government policy applicable to the facts of the case.
Necessary budget will also be allocated for the preservation and
conservation of the monument Sheesh Mahal. Hence, we see no reason to
further monitor this matter in view of the actions already initiated by the
respondent nos. 1 and 2, as enumerated in their counter-affidavit.
6. With these observations, this writ petition is hereby disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
OCTOBER 23, 2019
r.bararia
