Delhi High court orders graveyard fencing, bans new construction for people ‘to stay or live’ on Yamuna floodplains

In a stern order, the Delhi High Court recently directed authorities concerned to fence the graveyard and restrict any further construction for people “to stay or live” on the Yamuna floodplains in the national capital.

A bench of Justices Pratibha M Singh and Mameet Pritam Singh Arora was hearing a petition over the illegal constructions on the Yamuna river bank and its floodplain.

While terming it as a “serious issue” the court ordered that “people cannot be allowed to make their houses, tenements, sheds, etc., under the pretext of graveyard or for any other purpose”.

Directing the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and the Land and Development Office (L&DO) to “firstly fence the graveyard within the next one week” to curb any further expansion, the bench stressed on no more encroachment in area.

“If any burial has to take place, the same shall be within the fenced area and after the burial, no people shall be allowed to stay or live there. This would be an interim arrangement subject to further orders to be passed by this court,” the order passed on December 22 noted.

The matter arose from a writ petition filed by one Shabnam Burney alleging large-scale encroachments and illegal construction on the Yamuna floodplains, including near the Nau Gaza Peer Dargah (shrine) and an adjoining kabristan (graveyard).

On December 11, the court had directed authorities to remove all encroachments from the riverbed and floodplains and had expressed concern over continued occupation of the area by various agencies and individuals.

During the proceedings, the court was informed that multiple families were residing on the floodplain land and that construction activity had taken place in recent years.

A joint inspection conducted by officials of the DDA, L&DO, police and forest department revealed that several graves appeared to be newly constructed and that trees had been pruned or felled in the area.

According to revenue records examined during the inspection, the land was found to vest with the government.

Advocate NA Khan, appearing for the caretaker of the dargah and kabristan contended that the land in question had been allotted for use as a graveyard and was associated with religious practices.

He argued that burials had been taking place in the area and that the land was being wrongly treated as encroached government property.

Opposing these submissions, advocate SD Windlesh, the counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there was no kabristan at the site a decade ago and that all constructions and burials were of recent origin.

The counsel said that over 100 families were illegally residing on the floodplain, causing environmental damage and violating earlier court directions.

The DDA and L&DO relied on jamabandi records to assert that the ownership of the land vested with the government and that the alleged kabristan was unauthorised.

Rejecting the justification based on religious or burial use, the court made observations on the impermissibility of occupation on floodplains.

“Even if the same is taken at the highest, in the opinion of this Court it would not allow any construction or any family to live in the area,” the bench observed while dealing with the claim that the land was meant for a kabristan.

It also ruled that no person, including the caretaker, would be allowed to live on the floodplain land, permitting existing occupants time only to remove their belongings.

Clarifying the limited nature of permissible activity, the court said that if any burial were to take place, it must be confined strictly within the fenced area and that “after the burial, no people shall be allowed to stay or live there”.

The court further underlined the larger concern involved, stating that the court made it clear that floodplains are ecologically sensitive zones where no person can be allowed to live or raise structures, irrespective of the purpose cited.

Taking note of environmental degradation, including tree felling and recent construction, the bench directed the DDA and L&DO to fence the graveyard area within one week to prevent further expansion and ordered that no fresh construction shall be made.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on February 27, 2026, with the court directing senior officials of the DDA and L&DO to remain present and assist in ensuring strict compliance with its orders.