The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging the installation of a statue of Maharani Lakshmibai at Shahi Idgah Park, located in the Sadar Bazar area of the national capital.

The petition, filed by the Managing Committee of Shahi Idgah, was aimed at preventing the installation of the statue, claiming the land within the Idgah's boundaries belonged to the mosque. The case revolved around the disputed ownership of the park where the statue was to be installed. The petitioner argued that the entire property, including the park and open grounds surrounding the Idgah, fell under the jurisdiction of the Shahi Idgah and was managed by the Delhi Waqf Board (DWB).

The Single-Judge Bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma rejected the committee’s plea, stating that the petitioner's assertions regarding ownership were not supported by legal evidence.

"The assertions made by the petitioner/ Committee that the entire property including the surrounding park/open ground outside of the periphery of the Shahi Idgah also belongs to the DWB, is clearly belied from the short affidavit placed on the record by respondent No.4/DWB, in as much as the notification dated 16.04.1970, clearly demarcates that the Shahi Idgah is falling in Khasra No. 11 measuring 31601 Sq. Yards, which ais supported by the Jamabandi records for the year 1973-1974 referred to herein above; and therefore, the plea of the petitioner/Committee that the entire property falling within the Idgah‟s walls is the property of the Shahi Idgah, cannot be sustained on facts as well as the law," the Single-Judge said.

The Court found that the land in question was clearly under the jurisdiction of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA).

While dismissing the petition, the Court gave considerable weight to the affidavit filed by the Delhi Waqf Board. The affidavit clarified that the Shahi Idgah property was confined to a specific plot, Khasra No. 11, which measured 31,601 square yards. This was supported by Jamabandi records dating back to 1973-1974.

“First things first, the assertions made by the petitioner/commission that the entire property, including the surrounding park/open ground outside of the periphery of the Shahi Idgah also belongs to the DWB, is clearly belied from the short affidavit placed on the record by respondent No. 4/DWB,” the Court noted. It added that the petitioner’s claim, which sought to extend the Idgah's jurisdiction to the entire area within its walls, was "unsustainable both in fact and in law."

Further, the Court referred to a joint inspection conducted on September 13, 2024, by representatives of the DDA, Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), and the DWB. This inspection confirmed that the park and open grounds in question were under the ownership of the DDA. “The surrounding area inside the Idgah boundary, which includes the parks and open ground, belongs to the respondent No.1/DDA,” the Court observed, relying on the findings from the joint inspection.

In addition, the Court pointed out that an earlier ruling had already clarified that the parks surrounding the Shahi Idgah were under the DDA’s control and were being maintained by the DDA's Horticultural Division-II.

The Single-Judge also addressed the petitioner’s concern that the installation of the statue could interfere with religious practices at the Idgah. The Court found no merit in this argument, stating that the committee’s right to offer prayers or perform religious duties was not being jeopardized by the installation of the statue or the maintenance of the surrounding park by the DDA.

“Even assuming for the sake of argument that the petitioner has the locus standi to prefer this petition, the Court does not see how their right to offer prayers or to perform any religious rites is being endangered in any manner,” the Court said. It further emphasized that the petitioner had no legal or fundamental right to oppose the DDA’s management of the parks or to prevent the installation of the statue by the MCD.

Cause Title: Shahi Idgah Managing Committee vs. Delhi Development Authority & Ors [Neutral Citation No. 2024: DHC: 7324]

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Senior Advocate Viraj R. Datar, Advocates Imran Ahmed, Sajid Ahmed, Haji Mohd. Iqbal, Shuaib Ahmed Khan.

Respondent: Standing Counsel Shobhna Takiar, Advocates Kuljeet Singh, Abhinav Sharma, Mahender Shukla, Central Government Standing Counsel Kirtiman Singh, Advocates Waize Ali Noor, V Pratap Singh, Senior Advocate Sanjay Ghose, Additional Standing Counsel Firoz Iqbal Khan, Advocates Rohan Mandal, Mohit Garg, Bahist E Jahan

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Justice Dharmesh SharmaDelhi High Court

Sukriti Mishra