"Will move SC to challenge DDA's demarcation of properties in Batla House area": AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan

New Delhi [India], June 12 (ANI): Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Amanatullah Khan on Thursday said he would move the Supreme Court to challenge the Delhi Development Authority's (DDA) demarcation of properties in the Batla House area of Okhla.
The move followed directions from the High Court's Division Bench, which granted affected residents three days to file individual writ petitions.
This comes a day after Khan withdrew his Public Interest Litigation (PIL) from the Delhi High Court that had sought to stop demolition action initiated by the DDA.
Speaking to ANI, the AAP MLA said, "The Division Bench has given time for the affected parties to file their writ individually within three days. We have also withdrawn our PIL. People have been living there since 1971, and you suddenly declared it unauthorised and separated it from the PM-UDAY scheme."
"...The manner in which DDA wants to demolish this entire area is beyond my understanding...The demarcation done by them is not accurate. I withdrew my plea because I will challenge the demarcation before the Supreme Court," he said.
Khan withdrew the PIL on Wednesday to inform the residents of his area to file an appropriate petition before the court.
The withdrawal was allowed by a division bench of Justices Girish Kathpalia and Tejas Karia of the Delhi High Court, which suggested that individual residents approach the court with their grievances.
"In furtherance of the last order, senior counsel on the instructions of briefing counsel seeks permission to withdraw the petition filed by the petitioner, who is a public-spirited person, so he can inform the residents of Batla House to file an appropriate petition before the court," the High Court said.
At the outset of the hearing, the High Court noted that some aggrieved individuals have already been given protection by the court after hearing their individual petitions.
The High Court at the beginning emphasised that any adverse order while deciding the PIL may affect the rights of the individuals who are already before the single-judge bench.
The court has also emphasised that any aggrieved individual may approach the court like other people who have already approached the court. This issue is not a subject matter of the PIL.
Khan had filed a PIL challenging the notice issued by the DDA for the demolition of alleged illegal properties in the area of Batla House in Okhla.
The High Court on Monday had refused to grant an immediate interim stay on the demolition, which was proposed for June 11.
Earlier, the apex court on May 7 refused to grant relief and directed the demolition of the illegal properties.
Senior advocate Salman Khurshid appeared for the petitioner and argued that they (DDA) are pasting notices on the properties which fall beyond the khasra no. 279. The order of the Supreme Court was regarding the illegal properties within this khasra.
The counsel for respondents contended, on the other hand, that the PIL is not maintainable as the Supreme Court specifically directed that the individual aggrieved persons adopt the legal remedy.
DDA's counsel also said that the notices issued by the DDA are not generic and are in compliance with the Supreme Court. All the notices were given 15 days to respond. No demolition was carried out during the notice period. (ANI)