Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

november 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-11-17

CHATTAR SINGH vs DELHI CANTONMENT BOARD

Citation / case number
W.P.(C)-17385/2025 2025:DHC:10127
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
CHATTAR SINGH
Respondent
DELHI CANTONMENT BOARD

Judgment text excerpt

$~45 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 17th November, 2025 + W.P.(C) 17385/2025 & CM APPL. 71757/2025 CHATTAR SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rajan Malhotra, Adv. (Through VC) versus DELHI CANTONMENT BOARD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Tarveen Singh Nanda, SC with Mr. Gaurav Agarwal and Mr. Nitish Dham, Advs. for R-DCB (Through VC) CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL): 1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the final order dated 29th July, 2025, passed by the General Officer Commanding-in- Chief, Western Command, Chandi Mandir, in Appeal No. 03/2024 and the Demolition Notice dated 15th October, 2025, issued by the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”), Delhi Cantonment Board (“DCB”). 2. After some arguments, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court to the earlier orders passed by this Court viz. order dated 19th September, 2025, in W.P.(C) 14590/2025, titled as “Atul Tanwar & Anr. Versus Delhi Cantonment Board”, and order dated 25th September, 2025, passed in W.P.(C) 14883/2025, titled as “Deshraj Versus Delhi Cantonment Board”, and W.P.(C) 14884/2025, titled as “Smt. Krishna Versus Delhi Cantonment Board”, to submit that similar order be Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Page 1 of 3 By:HARIOM SHARMA Signing Date:17.11.2025 20:07:21 passed and that the petitioner is willing to file an application for regularization. 3. At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-DCB submits that in the present case, the construction has been made by the petitioner on the defence land. However, appropriate orders shall be passed, as and when, such application for regularization is filed by the petitioner. 4. Accordingly, having heard learned counsels

CHATTAR SINGH vs DELHI CANTONMENT BOARD · Niyam