Delhi HC issues notice on Sir Sobha Singh & Sons' plea challenging eviction proceedings in Sujan Singh Park case; declines interim stay

The High Court, however, declined to grant interim relief staying the proceedings before the Estate Officer and directed the petitioner to participate in the proceedings.

The Delhi High Court on Thursday issued notice on a writ petition filed by Sir Sobha Singh and Sons Pvt Ltd challenging eviction proceedings initiated by the Land & Development Office (L&DO) under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, in respect of the Sujan Singh Park (North) property. The High Court, however, declined to grant interim relief staying the proceedings before the Estate Officer and directed the petitioner to participate in the proceedings.

During the hearing, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Estate Officer was proceeding with the matter in undue haste and was not affording the company a reasonable opportunity to present its case. It was argued that despite raising preliminary objections, including on the issue of jurisdiction, the Estate Officer had continued with the proceedings without deciding those objections. Opposing the plea, Ashish Dixit, Standing Counsel for the Union of India, contended that the writ petition was not maintainable. He also produced the orders passed by the Estate Officer to demonstrate that sufficient opportunities had already been granted to the petitioner during the proceedings.

After hearing both sides, the High Court declined to stay the proceedings before the Estate Officer, issued notice on the writ petition, and directed the petitioner to continue participating in the proceedings. In its writ petition, Sir Sobha Singh and Sons Pvt Ltd has sought quashing of the June 11, 2026 notice issued under Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, along with a stay of the proceedings pending before the Estate Officer concerning 7.58 acres of Sujan Singh Park (North), New Delhi.

The company has contended that the Estate Officer lacks jurisdiction to proceed because the dispute over the validity of the alleged government re-entry into the property is already pending before the Delhi High Court in RSA No. 108/2026. The petition states that the company has been in possession of the property since 1943 under a Government Grant executed in 1945. It argues that the question of whether its occupation is "unauthorised" depends upon the validity of the alleged re-entry in 1960, an issue that is sub judice before the High Court. According to the petitioner, such a long-standing title dispute cannot be decided in summary proceedings under the Public Premises Act and must instead be adjudicated by a civil court.

The company has further alleged that although the Union of India had undertaken before the High Court in the pending second appeal that the Public Premises Act proceedings would be conducted without reference to or being influenced by the District Judge's June 9, 2026 judgment, the Estate Officer has continued with the proceedings without first deciding its preliminary jurisdictional objections. It has therefore sought urgent intervention from the High Court to quash the notice and halt the eviction proceedings. (ANI)