Who will get Ramlily campus in Delhi? HC challenges DDA’s first-come, first-served policy, seeks directions for allotment of | Today’s news
The Delhi High Court has reportedly ruled that the Delhi Development Authority’s (DDA) first-come, first-served policy of allotting public land for Ramlila and similar cultural or religious events is arbitrary and cannot be judicially accepted.
“The decisiveness of the criterion and its inherent rationality are two distinct issues. As a result, the policy of ‘first come, first served’ finds no favor in this court…,” the court said under Live Law.
Read also | Ramlila Maidan booking top ₹ 1.2 lakh, no dates till December: Report
According to the report, Justice Amit Mahajan noted that a mechanically determinable policy is not necessarily constitutionally sound or consistent with public policy.
The bench also noted that such a policy could create unequal opportunities for applicants, especially if the reservation process and relevant criteria were not made public in advance.
What is it about?
Justice Mahajan heard the suit filed by Rays of New Beginning Foundation. She challenged the rejection of her application for allotment of Chunk-C Ground at Shivaji Place, Raja Garden to host the annual Ramlila Dussehra Mahotsav, Live Law reported.
The foundation also sought the cancellation of the allocation in favor of another organization and a directive to allocate the land to itself.
According to the foundation’s report, it organized the festival at the venue in 2023 and 2024. It said that as per the DDA’s standard operating procedure (SOP) dated September 1, companies that had booked respective Ramlila venues in two of the previous three years had the right to prioritize booking the same venue.
Read also | Dussehra 2025: Bobby Deol performs Ravan Dahan at Ramlila celebration in Delhi
However, the authorities rejected her application, saying that another applicant had already submitted an application earlier, on April 10, while the foundation’s application was received on May 27.
The authorities relied on the High Level Coordination Committee (HLCC) guidelines, according to which the allocation was on a first-come, first-served basis.
What did the court decide?
The High Court rejected the said reasoning and noted that no notification or public notice was issued specifying the application window or informing the prospective applicants that the allotment would be on a first-come, first-served basis.
The court further noted that the policy incentivized applicants to inquire about the availability of public lands before others, potentially favoring those with privileged access to administrative information.
Read also | Rekha Gupta’s Oath of the Day: Traffic Alert, Routes to Drive, Avoid
“Even without actual favoritism, uncertainty about the initiation of the reservation process can create unequal opportunities to secure the earliest possible status,” the court said, according to Live Law.
He added that the problem becomes particularly acute when public authorities receive requests before the governing policy is published, then change the booking procedure or rely on different procedures applied by different departments.
The High Court refused to grant immediate relief to the foundation, saying that the festivities had started early and cancellation of the existing allotment was not possible.
He directed the Delhi Municipal Shelter Improvement Board to draw up comprehensive annual guidelines for allotment of land for Ramlila and similar cultural or religious events.
Read also | Dussehra Payouts: Central Govt Employees Demand ₹21,000 Bonus Cap
It said the guidelines are prospective and will not retroactively change the terms of the policy applicable to the 2026 season or pre-determine any claimant’s rights under the policy.
The Delhi High Court issued the following directions:
1. The competent authority must publish an annual notice of seat allocation at least 90 days before the first scheduled event, stating the grounds available, reservation dates, eligibility conditions, restrictions, fees and evaluation criteria.
2. All requests for a specific location and booking period should normally be received in the same pre-determined application window.
3. Any place that remains unallocated after the initial process should be re-announced through the supplementary application window, which is open to all eligible applicants.
4. All applications must undergo a joint eligibility assessment, including verification of the applicant’s authority to represent the organization and compliance with registration and documentation requirements.
5. Applicants may be required to submit site-specific operational plans covering crowd capacity, security measures, emergency response, fire and electrical safety, sanitation, traffic and parking management, accessibility, waste disposal and land reclamation.
6. Where multiple eligible applicants are competing for the same site, authorities should conduct a comparative evaluation using a predetermined and published scoring matrix or other published criteria.
7. Previous promoters with satisfactory compliance records may receive limited priority but may not be automatically entitled to allocation. If there are competing eligible claimants, this preference cannot exceed two consecutive years and competing claims must be assessed on their merits.
8. The policy must provide an adequate grievance redressal mechanism, with an annual timetable ensuring that allocation and the normal grievance process are completed well in advance of the start of the event.
(With inputs from Live Law)
