Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta directed the status quo and posted the matter for hearing on July 10 with other petitions.

Advocate Fahad Khan argued that the DDA and Delhi government had “indiscriminately targeted properties beyond the identified area and without issuance of individual notices”.

During a field survey on June 4, the lawyer said, the petitioners’ properties were marked for demolition and they were informed of an “imminent coercive action” despite the structures being outside the demolition zone or covered under the PM-UDAY Scheme.

“No demarcation report or verification of PM-UDAY eligibility has been provided to the petitioners till date. The threatened action thus amounts to a clear violation of the principles of natural justice, the right to livelihood and the equal protection guaranteed under the Constitution,” the petition claimed.

The petitioners further referred to the interim protection granted by the court to other similarly-placed persons.

On July 16, the court ordered a similar status quo while hearing a batch of pleas against the DDA demolition order whereas on June 11, the high court refused relief in the PIL of AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan.

The high court said passing a general order of protection in a PIL of such nature was likely to jeopardise the case of individual litigants.

The Supreme Court on May 7 ordered the “DDA to demolish unauthorised structures in Khasra number 279”.

The land is estimated to be around 2.8 bigha or 0.702 hectare along Muradi Road in Okhla village. PTI MNR MNR AMK AMK