The Delhi High Court recently ruled in favor of a high-rise group housing project in Vasant Kunj, dismissing objections from a local resident welfare association and a neighboring school. These groups had argued that the new development would disrupt the area’s low-rise character and contravene existing planning norms. The case, cited as Vasant Kunj Residents Welfare Association v. Government of NCT, Delhi & Ors, was presided over by Justice Shail Jain.
Justice Jain clarified that the Master Plan for Delhi does not impose a perpetual height restriction on new buildings, emphasizing that new constructions need not adhere to the height limitations of older structures in the vicinity. “Delhi is a land-constrained metropolitan city facing continuous demographic pressure, rapid urbanization, and a growing demand for residential accommodation,” Justice Jain noted. He added that the Master Plan for Delhi-2021 (MPD-2021) encourages optimal land use through planned redevelopment and vertical growth, especially in areas with existing infrastructure and amenities.
The contested project stands approximately 30-33 meters tall, significantly higher than the surrounding Delhi Development Authority (DDA) flats, which are about 12 meters in height. The Vasant Kunj Residents Welfare Association and Masonic Public School contended that this vertical expansion violated the 2018 DDA Regulations, which mandate conformity with the surrounding development. However, the court ruled that “conformity” does not necessitate new structures to mirror the exact height of neighboring buildings.
Justice Jain stated, “The fact that such structures were originally developed at comparatively lower height and density levels cannot operate as an absolute or perpetual restriction prohibiting all future intensification of residential development within planned urban areas.” The court accepted the DDA’s stance that similar multi-storeyed developments already exist within the broader Vasant Kunj scheme.
The court further noted that as long as the proposed development adheres to statutory planning controls and environmental safeguards, the goal of planned urban development should not be obstructed merely because new structures are taller or denser than older ones. The DDA’s Technical Committee clarified that the MPD-2021 does not impose an independent height cap as argued by the opposition.
More Read
The resident association and school also raised concerns about potential violations of MPD-2021, along with environmental and civic norms, citing safety risks, construction noise, and pollution. However, the developers and authorities argued that the project is part of an integrated layout with all necessary statutory clearances secured. The court sided with the developers, finding no evidence of illegality or arbitrariness to justify judicial intervention.
Senior Advocate Ajay Verma, along with advocates Shreyuss Shankar Joshi, Shresth Arya, Madhav Bhatia, Anisha Awasthi, Amisha, and Muskan Aggarwal, represented the resident welfare association. Advocates Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Sunil Kumar Jha, MS Akhtar, and Kushagra Dixit appeared for the Delhi government, while Senior Advocate Vibha Mahajan, along with advocates Eshna Kumar, Mahima, M. Poudiuwibou, and Piyush Tandon, represented the public school. The developer was represented by Senior Advocate Anurag Ahluwalia and a team of advocates including Devika Mohan, Aakash Sehrawat, Cyril, Dipanshu Gaba, and Dhruv Negi. Advocates Prabhasahay Kaur and Aditya Verma appeared for the Delhi Development Authority, and Senior Advocate Ajjay Aroraa, with advocates Vikas Chopra, Neeraj Kumar, and Vansh Luthra, represented the Municipal Corporation of Delhi.
