Authorities must remove identified road encroachments; Section 152 BNSS provides statutory remedy for public nuisance.

The Petitioner, a Residence Welfare Association (RWA), filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to restrain "Bhoo-Mafias" and illegal encroachers from grabbing and blocking a public road (Public Rasta No. 31) in Village Kamalpur Mazra Burari, Delhi

The land, situated in Khasra No. 31, is Gram Sabha/Government land handed over to the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) on 15.12.2020.

However, the physical boundaries remained unidentifiable due to the lack of a verified Total Survey Station (TSS) superimposed Sajra plan

During the proceedings, a joint survey was conducted on 05.06.2025 using satellite imaging and TSS verification to ascertain the road's width, length, and current alignment

1. Whether the respondents failed in their duty to protect public land (Rasta No. 31) from unauthorized encroachment and obstruction

2. Whether the Court should issue specific directions for the removal of identified encroachments and the abatement of public nuisance on the subject site

The Court's jurisdiction was invoked under the principles of administrative law regarding the duty of public authorities to protect government land.

The Court specifically relied upon Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which empowers a jurisdictional magistrate to pass conditional orders for the removal of public nuisances

the court applied the principle of administrative undertaking, where the State’s commitment to perform statutory duties (demolition of unauthorized structures) is recorded to dispose of the litigation

The Court analyzed the status report filed by the DDA, which utilized a TSS-verified Sajra plan to categorize the site into four segments: vacant land (107m), encroached alignment (111m), existing use-pathway, and temporary debris

The DDA's technical analysis revealed that while a portion of the original Sajra alignment was encroached (marked yellow in the survey), current site visits did not show permanent occupation by "Bhoo-mafias," but rather temporary deposits of malba (rubble)

The Court observed that the DDA had already initiated approval processes for demolition, which were only delayed due to environmental (GRAP-III) restrictions

Consequently, the Court found that the DDA had taken "adequate steps" to identify the boundaries and fulfill its mandate, making further judicial intervention unnecessary at this stage, provided the DDA's undertaking to remove obstructions was placed on record

The Court granted the Petitioner liberty to: (a) approach the DDA with further grievances if steps are not fully implemented, and (b) approach the jurisdictional magistrate under Section 152 of the BNSS to seek a conditional order for the removal of any persisting public nuisance

No specific writ of mandamus was issued, as the respondent's voluntary remedial actions were deemed sufficient