The Delhi High Court directed residents of three slum clusters near the Prime Minister’s residence in Delhi’s Race Course area to vacate within 15 days and shift to government-provided accommodation, warning authorities could initiate legal action if occupants failed to comply within the prescribed timeframe.
The Delhi High Court ordered residents of three slum clusters located near the Prime Minister’s residence in the Race Course area of Delhi to vacate their camps within 15 days and move to alternative accommodation provided by the government.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav also cautioned that if residents did not comply within the given timeframe, the authorities would be entitled to proceed in line with the law.
The Bench ordered,
“The petitioners were first served eviction notices on 29.10.2025. Sufficient time has elapsed since then and the petitioners have been aware of the subsequent developments that have taken place during the pendency of these matters. In view thereof, the petitioners shall vacate the present camps within fifteen days from today, failing which, the respondents shall be at liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with law,”
The Court noted that the government had decided to relocate the residents due to national security considerations, particularly because the settlements were situated close to highly sensitive installations. Justice Kaurav said that, in matters involving security-related policy choices, courts should generally exercise restraint before intervening.
Justice Kaurav said,
“The Court thus, finds that, considering contemporary geopolitical events, national security concerns of the respondents satisfy as specific reasons for eviction of the petitioners,”
The directions came during the hearing of petitions filed by residents of Bhai Ram Camp, DID Camp, and Masjid Camp. The petitioners challenged the demolition and relocation drive carried out by the authorities and opposed the proposed rehabilitation at Savda Ghevra in outer Delhi.
These slum clusters are situated near the Prime Minister’s official residence and close to sensitive defence establishments, including an active Air Force station. The Union government submitted that the presence of densely populated informal settlements in the area raised security risks, and that relocation was required urgently.
Those who approached the High Court argued that shifting hundreds of families to Savda Ghevra would heavily affect their daily routines and sources of livelihood. Many petitioners stated that they worked in central Delhi as drivers, domestic workers, labourers, and service providers, and that relocating to outer Delhi would put their jobs at risk while also making commutes significantly harder.
Petitioners further submitted that relocation would also limit access to essential services such as schools, healthcare facilities, and public transport. Several families claimed that their children’s education would be disrupted due to the sudden change in residence.
The Central government defended the relocation by stressing national security concerns. It informed the Court that the camps were next to strategically sensitive military infrastructure and that the decision to relocate had been taken after due deliberation.
The government also stated that basic civic infrastructure such as sewer lines, water supply, roads, and parks had already been provided at the rehabilitation site in Savda Ghevra, while additional facilities were being developed.
The Court was also told that the government had agreed to cover the beneficiary contribution of Rs 1.12 lakh, which residents would otherwise have had to pay under rehabilitation guidelines. According to the authorities, families would only be required to pay maintenance charges after three months.
While reviewing the matter, the High Court acknowledged that the right to shelter and livelihood forms an important part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
However, it held that relocation and rehabilitation would not amount to a violation of constitutional rights provided the authorities follow the rehabilitation policies and ensure adequate facilities for those being displaced.
Accordingly, the Court directed the government and the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (DUSIB) to strictly comply with the DUSIB Policy and the DUSIB Protocol. The authorities were specifically asked to ensure proper arrangements for education, transportation, sanitation, water supply, and other essential services for the relocated families.
Justice Kaurav also directed petitioners who had not yet accepted allotment letters for alternative accommodation to obtain the same immediately from the authorities.
Advocates Pankaj Sinha, Garima, and Sunil Tiwari appeared for petitioner Khushnuma Khan and others. Senior Advocate Sandeep Sharma, along with advocates Javed and Kavya Dauk, represented petitioner Rakesh Bansal and others.
Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma appeared for the Union of India, along with advocates Syed Abdul Haseeb, Nasreen Khatoon, Muhammad Aamir Khan, Syed Abdur Rahman, Piyush Gupta, Atishay Jain, Vishesh Goel, Shrey Sharawat, and Himanshu Sihag. Advocates Anuj Chaturvedi, Richa Dhawan, and Yashita Jain appeared for DUSIB.
Case Title: KHUSHNUMA KHAN & ORS. Vs UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND URBAN AFFAIRS & ORS.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES