New Delhi

The Delhi High Court has expressed strong dissatisfaction with the progress made by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) and Land & Development Office (L&DO) in finalising a policy for conversion of properties from leasehold to freehold, observing that “scores of citizens” cannot be made to wait indefinitely for conversion of their properties.

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Vikas Mahajan said it was “clearly not satisfied” with the progress made since its previous order and noted that the minutes of a meeting between the authorities actually revealed that there was “no clarity on any policy whatsoever” either on documentation or conversion charges.

The court granted MoHUA, DDA and L&DO a “last and final opportunity” to place their final policy on record at least three days before the next hearing. The matter has been listed for September 28, with the Secretary, Department of Capital Development, MoHUA, and the DDA Vice Chairman directed to join the proceedings.

The court was hearing a set of matters concerning the DDA’s portal for conversion of immovable properties from leasehold to freehold. The portal has remained taken down since February 2026, resulting in applications being kept on hold.

The bench also made it clear that any new policy announced by the authorities would have to operate prospectively. It noted that a large number of applications were already pending in which conversion charges had been collected by the DDA, but the applications were not being processed because the portal had been taken down.

The court referred to its earlier order, which recorded that 1,373 applications were pending and the DDA had already collected Rs 155.06 crore in conversion charges. It directed that all such past applications for which payments had already been received would have to be processed according to the policy prevalent at the relevant point in time.

The bench also relied on an earlier decision of the High Court in Neera Sharma v Delhi Development Authority, where the court had held that when conversion charges had already been deposited along with an application, the applicant could not be subjected to subsequently revised rates merely because the authority took time to process the application. 

The present bench observed that the decision clearly indicated that the applicable charges would be those prevailing on the date of filing, particularly where the applicant had already deposited the charges.

The court’s observations came after the authorities placed on record minutes of a meeting held on August 14 between MoHUA, DDA, L&DO and the Department of Revenue. The minutes showed discussions on simplifying documentation, reducing procedural steps and reviewing conversion charges.

The authorities had acknowledged that several documents currently required from applicants were duplicative, some had become outdated, and certain information could be verified online. They had agreed to review and prune the documentation requirements and adopt online verification wherever feasible.

The meeting also discussed simplifying the conversion process to make it more citizen-friendly, reduce processing time and minimise the compliance burden on applicants. 

The existing conversion charges, which had not been revised for a considerable period, were also proposed to be comprehensively reviewed.

The authorities had sought time until December 31 to examine the documentation, procedure and conversion charges and arrive at a comprehensive policy. However, the High Court was not persuaded by the progress made so far.

The court further noted that although the minutes stated that the existing policy being kept on hold did not prevent leaseholders from transferring, gifting, inheriting or mortgaging their properties under the established procedure, none of the lawyers appearing before it could explain the mechanism for transferring leasehold properties.

READ MORE:Qazi Tauqeer Bigg Boss entry brings him back into centerstage

The DDA’s Vice Chairman informed the court that the DDA and L&DO were in active consultation and would submit their recommendations within two weeks. The court, however, recorded its dissatisfaction with the lack of clarity and directed the authorities to place their final policy on record before the next hearing.