Batla House Demolition | AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan Withdraws PIL From Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday, 11 June, dismissed as withdrawn a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan challenging the proposed demolition in Batla House, observing that a general protection order in such a plea could prejudice individual cases.

A division bench of Justice Girish Kathpalia and Justice Tejas Karia refused to grant relief, adding that affected residents may approach the court individually.

Appearing for Khan, senior advocate Salman Khurshid sought permission to withdraw the PIL. The court, therefore, allowed the petitioner to withdraw the PIL.

“Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn,” the bench said.

In its order, the court said the petitioner may inform local residents of Batla House of their right to initiate appropriate legal proceedings within three working days.

In the last hearing, the court had refused to grant an immediate stay on the demolition. Senior advocate Salman Khurshid, appearing for Khan, had sought an urgent stay, pointing out that the demolition was scheduled for June 11.

The DDA, however, argued that Khan was neither a party to the earlier proceedings nor an affected individual. It also submitted that the Supreme Court had already refused interim protection to similarly placed persons. The top court, on May 7, 2025, passed an order permitting the demolition of illegal constructions in the area.

The Division Bench had also noted that earlier in the day, Justice Tejas Karia, while sitting as a single judge, had granted interim protection to some residents similarly situated to those represented in the present petition. While referring to a single judge's order of June 4, the court observed that the single judge had granted interim status quo to some residents and had directed DDA to file its response within four weeks.

Therefore, the court said that it has to deal with two issues. The first issue pertains to whether the division bench can continue hearing the petition, as one of the judges had earlier heard similar petitions and granted relief.

"Secondly, learned counsel for the respondents appearing on advance intimation contends that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already declined protection to the allegedly affected parties and this being a Public Interest Litigation, no stay order can be passed because that would require examination of individual cases," the court had added.

Case Title: Amanatullah Khan v. Delhi Development Authority