Temporary use of a park for a Ramlila cannot override the High Court’s earlier directions to restore and maintain it as a green space for residents, the Delhi High Court has held, dismissing the organiser’s challenge to the DDA’s cancellation of its booking for Chintoo Park in Naraina.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ petition by Shri Sanatan Dharam Ramleela Samiti challenging the Delhi Development Authority’s cancellation of its booking of Chintoo Park, Naraina, for holding a Ramlila, holding that the requirement of maintaining the park as a green and recreational space for the welfare of the residents of Naraina Vihar must take precedence over its temporary use for the Ramlila [Shri Sanatan Dharam Ramleela Samiti v. Delhi Development Authority and Others].
Justice Jasmeet Singh passed the order on September 28, 2026. The Court declined to direct that the petitioner be permitted to hold the Ramlila at the park during the period in question, noting that there are plenty of other grounds available for conducting a Ramlila, as the DDA’s counsel had informed the Court.
Background of the case
The petitioner said it has organised the annual Ramlila at Chintoo Park for several decades with the requisite permissions and NOCs. It contended that its online booking request, Request ID/Challan No. 958849, for the period from September 30 to October 25, 2026 was arbitrarily cancelled by the DDA on September 9, 2026, with the sole remark “Cancelled due to Hon’ble High Court Directions”, and without notice, hearing or reasons. It sought to quash the cancellation, a direction to the DDA to reconsider the booking under its policy and SOP, and, pending the petition, a direction that the request be kept alive and not rejected solely on an alleged blanket prohibition arising from the orders in W.P.(C) 36/2026.
The petitioner argued that the orders in Lalit Anand v. Government of NCT of Delhi (W.P.(C) 36/2026) only concern removal of encroachments, prevention of parking and maintenance of the park as a green area, and do not prohibit a Ramlila or religious functions at the site. The DDA’s standing counsel, Manika Tripathy, stated that pursuant to the order of January 5, 2026 in that case the park is being used for the welfare of the residents of Naraina Vihar Colony, as shown by a status report handed over in Court and photographs she showed the Court.
The Court’s reasoning
The Court noted that the orders in W.P.(C) 36/2026 were issued in the context of the park’s condition, including encroachments and other unauthorised uses, and directed its restoration and maintenance for the benefit of the residents. A later order of August 19, 2026 directed that, until the land is put to its allotted use, a community centre or old age home, the respondents shall maintain it as a green area.
It held that the proposed Ramlila, though for a limited period and despite the petitioner’s willingness to follow conditions, would entail temporary occupation of the park by a large number of persons and the installation of structures and facilities, and that such use cannot be considered in isolation from the purpose for which the park is presently to be maintained. The fact that the event was held at the site in earlier years, or that permissions may have been granted earlier, cannot override the subsequent directions for restoration and maintenance. Nor did the submission that the Ramlila would be confined to the existing stage area change the position, since the question is not permanent damage to the green area but whether the temporary use is consistent with the manner in which the park is now required to be maintained. Balancing the two, the Court held:
“…the latter requirement outweighs the petitioner’s claim for temporary use of the park.”
Result
Finding no reason to entertain the petition, the Court dismissed it. The Delhi Development Authority, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, the Government of NCT of Delhi and the Station House Officer had accepted notice through counsel before the order.
Case Title: Shri Sanatan Dharam Ramleela Samiti v. Delhi Development Authority and Others
Case Number: W.P.(C) 14360/2026
Bench: Justice Jasmeet Singh, Delhi High Court
Date of Order: September 28, 2026
Appearance: Advocates Dhruv Chawla, Manish Tanwar, Kanika Singhal, Vipul Saini, Mohit Tomar and Nikhil Mann for the petitioner; Standing Counsel Manika Tripathy with Advocates Chirag Sharma and Aman Kumar for the DDA; Advocates Sumit K. Batra and Priyanka Jindal for the GNCTD; Standing Counsel Manu Chaturvedi for the MCD; Advocates Puneet Dhwan and Anish Ahmad for the SHO