W.P.(C) 14313/2025 $~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 14313/2025 & CM APPL. 58589/2025 M/S SONIA AND CO. PVT. LTD .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Smita Mann, Mr. Vishal Maan, Mr. Kartik Dabas, Advocates. versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay K. Pathak, SC with Mr. K.K. Kiran Pathak, Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Mr. Md. Sueb Akhtar, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Manashwy Jha, Advocate for R-2&3. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R % 24.09.2025 1. The petitioner claims ownership over land comprised in Khasra No. 66/1 (4-16) admeasuring 4 Bighas and 16 Biswas situated in Revenue Estate of Village Jonapur, New Delhi [“subject land”]. The grievance raised in this writ petition pertains to proceedings initiated in respect of the subject land under Section 185 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 [“DLR Act”]. It is undisputed that the said village was urbanised pursuant to a notification dated 20.11.2019 issued under Section 507(a) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957. 2. The petitioner contends that, by virtue of the judgment of the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/09/2025 at 11:56:25 W.P.(C) 14313/2025 Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh (deceased) through LRs & Anr. v. Narain Singh & Ors. [(2023) 19 SCC 535], proceedings under the DLR Act stand rendered non-est upon the urbanisation of the village in question. 3. In the present case, the proceedings were admittedly initiated prior to the issuance of the aforesaid notification of urbanisation. The Revenue Authority passed an order in favour of the petitioner on 27.02.1987, which was challenged in appeal before the respondent No. 1 in 1997. The appellate proceedings remained pending at the time the urbanisation notification was issued. The question that arises is whether such proceedings can continue despite the village in question being urbanised, including at the appellate stage. This issue is currently pending consideration before the Full Bench in Original Reference No. 01/2024. The Full Bench is also examining two Division Bench judgments of this Court, in Ajay Singhal v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. [LPA 169/2022 and connected matters; decided on 25.04.2023] and Subnam Gupta (Sabnam Gupta) v. Union of India & Ors. [LPA 295/2024; decided on 15.04.2024], which appear to be at variance with each other on this question. 4. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the respondents are directed not to proceed with the pending proceedings until the jurisdictional position is clarified by the judgment of the Full Bench. Upon pronouncement of the said judgment, respondent No. 1 will first decide whether the proceedings are liable to continue, and pass an order to that effect. In the event, respondent No. 1 concludes that the proceedings may continue, the same will remain deferred for a period of This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/09/2025 at 11:56:25 W.P.(C) 14313/2025 two weeks from the date of such decision, so as to enable the petitioner to avail appropriate legal remedies, if so advised. 5. The writ petition, alongwith pending application, is disposed of with these directions. PRATEEK JALAN, J SEPTEMBER 24, 2025 ‘Bhupi/sd’/ This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/09/2025 at 11:56:25