$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6624/2026 & CM APPL. 32538/2026 CHANDRAWATI (THROUGH SPA HOLDER/ RAKESH SINGH) .....Petitioner Through: Mr. R.K. Tarun, Capt. Subedita Rani, Ms. Aditi Shivadhatri, Mr. Hemant Jain, Ms. Khushi Gupta and Mr. R.R. Bharti, Advocates. versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mohit Agarwal, Advocate for SDM. Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, SC with Mr. Aditya Verma and Mr. Kamlendu Pandey, Advocates for DDA. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA O R D E R % 20.07.2026 1. Issue notice. Mr. Mohit Agarwal, counsel appearing for the SDM, and Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur, SC for the DDA, accept notice. 2. The Petitioner claims ownership in respect of land bearing Khasra No. 104/17/1, situated at Village Burari, Delhi - 110084. It is stated that the Petitioner submitted a representation dated 4th May, 2026 before the SDM, Burari, seeking demarcation of the subject land. However, no decision has been taken thereon till date. 3. However, in view of the fact that the village in question has been urbanised pursuant to a notification issued under Section 507 of the Delhi 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 22/07/2026 at 12:55:11 Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, there exists a jurisdictional ambiguity as to whether the demarcation exercise is to be undertaken by the DDA or the GNCTD. 4. As far as this aspect is concerned, in Luv Nagpal & Anr. v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi1, this Court directed the GNCTD and the DDA to conduct the demarcation exercise jointly in the presence of the petitioners or their representatives, so that the process is not held up pending resolution of the jurisdictional issue. 5. The same approach has been followed in subsequent decisions, including Rajender Singh & Anr. v. SDM Revenue Assistant Mehrauli2. 6. Counsel for the Respondents submit that the present writ petition may also be disposed of on similar terms. 7. The Petitioner submits that he is willing to bear the expenses for carrying out the demarcation exercise. Accordingly, and having regard to the fact that the DDA is also a party to the present proceedings, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the demarcation exercise in respect of the subject land shall be carried out through a third-party agency, in coordination between the GNCTD and the DDA, within a period of eight weeks from today. The Petitioner or his authorised representative will be associated with the demarcation exercise, and the expenses thereof shall be borne by the Petitioner. 8. It is made clear that the aforesaid directions shall remain subject to any orders passed by the Full Bench in O.REF. No. 1/2024, titled State on its Own Motion v. NEMO. It is further clarified that this order is passed 1 W.P.(C) 13567/2025, decided on 03rd September, 2025. 2 W.P.(C) 14600/2025, decided on 08th October, 2025. 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 22/07/2026 at 12:55:11 without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the GNCTD and the DDA in the said reference. 9. In the above terms, the petition is disposed of along with the pending application. SANJEEV NARULA, J JULY 20, 2026 as 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 22/07/2026 at 12:55:11