By Rajesh Pandey
In a significant development concerning the alleged encroachments on a pond in Ghaziabad, the Allahabad High Court has directed all parties involved to maintain the status quo as of July 31, 2025, regarding occupancy at the site.
The decision comes in response to a writ petition filed by Naresh Kumar and 18 others, who have claimed continuous residence in the area for the past 40–50 years.
The petitioners moved the High Court challenging a demolition notice dated June 16, 2025, issued by the Ghaziabad Development Authority (GDA) under Section 26-A of the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973.
The GDA had earlier identified the petitioners among 172 alleged illegal occupants of a piece of land marked as a public park in the city’s master plan.
Despite the notice being initially served on September 6, 2024, and 89 people submitting objections, the GDA passed a final order directing the removal of the structures.
The petitioners, mostly from economically weaker sections, argued that no rehabilitation plan has been provided by the law, and any forced eviction without resettlement would cause them irreparable harm.
A division bench comprising Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Prashant Kumar acknowledged the humanitarian aspects of the case and took note of the prolonged stay of the petitioners on the disputed land. The bench remarked:
In the facts and circumstances of the case, we also find that it is not in dispute that the petitioners have been occupying the place for the last more than 40–50 years. At this stage, we find that some indulgence and reprieve are to be accorded to the inhabitants who belong to the weaker sections of society.”
The court directed the district administration and the GDA to formulate and present a rehabilitation scheme on the next date of hearing, August 22, 2025. Until then, the authorities have been restrained from evicting the residents or demolishing the structures, and the petitioners have also been barred from creating third-party rights or carrying out any construction on the disputed land.
During the proceedings, it was submitted by the petitioners’ counsel that despite earlier directions from the court, no concrete remedial action or rehabilitation framework had been developed by the authorities to accommodate the long-term settlers.
The High Court, while not invalidating the GDA’s authority under the Urban Planning Act, emphasized the need for a balanced approach that upholds the rights and dignity of marginalized communities who have been in undisturbed occupation for decades.
The matter will now be reviewed again on August 22, when the rehabilitation plan is expected to be placed before the bench.