Procedural Inefficiency and Portal Downtime Cannot Justify Non-Compliance With Judicial Orders for Property Conversion

The Appellant (DDA) challenged a Single Judge's order dated March 18, 2026, which directed the DDA to process the Respondents' application for converting property from leasehold to freehold despite a 43-day delay.

In a related writ petition, the Court had directed DDA to process the conversion, recording the Respondents' undertaking to pay Goods and Services Tax (GST) if the pending legal issue regarding GST liability were decided against them.

Despite a subsequent contempt proceeding where DDA gave an undertaking to communicate a decision within four weeks, the DDA failed to process the application, citing a pending policy revision by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and the non-functionality of its "IDLI" portal since January 2, 2026.

1. Whether the DDA can withhold processing a pre-existing conversion application based on a pending policy decision or the non-functionality of its digital portal.

2. Whether the continued delay in restoration of the conversion process at a systemic level constitutes a violation of citizens' rights to deal with immovable properties.

The court primarily applied Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, regarding the maintainability of appeals against contempt orders.

It also relied on the principle of administrative accountability, asserting that internal technical failures (IDLI portal) or administrative consultations between ministries cannot indefinitely suspend the statutory or policy-based rights of citizens to convert property titles.

The court emphasized that even when policy changes are contemplated, they typically apply prospectively and should not stall "pre-existing applications" as per the DDA’s own office order dated January 19, 2026.

The Court reasoned that the DDA’s excuse regarding the non-functional IDLI portal was unacceptable as it had been offline for nearly seven months, severely hindering citizens' ability to transact property, settle family estates, or finalize titles.

The Court highlighted that the DDA’s own internal office order clarified that the hold on conversion applied only to fresh applications, meaning there was no legal impediment to processing the Respondents' pending case.

Furthermore, the court noted that while inter-ministerial consultations with the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and the Ministry of Finance might be necessary for revenue-impact issues like GST, such processes must be concluded with "due expedition" and cannot justify a prolonged administrative vacuum.

The Court directed the Vice Chairman of the DDA to file a status report explaining the portal's failure and providing a timeline for its restoration, ordered his personal presence on the next hearing, and listed the matter for further compliance on July 30, 2026.