Delhi HC: 'First Come, First Served' Not Fair for Ramleela Grounds
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a first-come, first-served policy is not a fair way to allot public grounds for Ramleela and religious events.
In a significant ruling aimed at ensuring fairness in the use of public spaces, the Delhi High Court has declared that a "first come, first served" policy cannot be the only factor used to allot public grounds for Ramleela and other religious or cultural festivities. The court observed that such a method fails to meet the standards of constitutional fairness and can lead to unequal opportunities for different applicants.
Justice Amit Mahajan, presiding over the matter, noted that being the earliest to apply does not automatically grant an organization the strongest claim to a public facility. The court highlighted that a policy cannot be justified simply because the timing of an application is easy to prove; it must also be inherently rational and fair.
The Risk of an 'Unequal Race for Information'
The court raised concerns that relying solely on application dates could trigger an "unequal race for information." This approach potentially favors organizations that have privileged access to administrative details regarding when public grounds become available, leaving others at a disadvantage.
The observations were made during a petition filed by the Rays of New Beginning Foundation. The foundation had challenged the rejection of its application to use the Chunk-C Ground at Shivaji Place in Raja Garden, West Delhi, for its annual Ramleela Dussehra Mahotsav. While the court did not cancel the current allotment or transfer the ground to the petitioner for the 2026 season, it issued strict directions to overhaul how these spaces are managed.
New Mandatory Guidelines for DUSIB
The Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board (DUSIB) has been directed to review its existing instructions and create comprehensive annual guidelines. To ensure transparency, the court mandated the following:
- Advance Notice: An annual notice identifying available grounds, booking dates, eligibility, and charges must be published at least 90 days before the first scheduled event.
- Common Application Window: Applications for the same site and period should be invited within a predetermined, shared timeframe.
- Scoring Matrix: If multiple eligible groups apply for the same ground, their claims must be evaluated using a transparent, published scoring system.
- Grievance Redressal: A clear mechanism must be in place to handle complaints before events begin.
Preventing Monopolies in Cultural Events
The High Court also cautioned authorities against allowing a de facto monopoly, where the same organizations are repeatedly granted the same grounds year after year. While the court acknowledged that an organization's experience and past compliance record are relevant, these factors should not override competing claims.
Key restrictions on repeat organizers include:
- Preference for a previous organizer should not extend beyond two consecutive years.
- Competing claims must be assessed strictly on merit.
- A satisfactory compliance record may offer limited preference but does not grant an automatic right to the site.
Strict Operational Requirements
Moving forward, the court suggested that authorities should require applicants to submit detailed operational plans. These plans must address critical safety and management issues, including:
- Crowd capacity and entry/exit arrangements.
- Emergency response, fire, and electrical safety.
- Sanitation, waste removal, and ground restoration.
- Traffic, parking management, and accessibility.
The legal battle began after the Rays of New Beginning Foundation's application for the 2026 festivities was rejected. The authorities had defended their decision by stating that another applicant had applied earlier, on April 10, following their existing "first-come, first-served" guidelines.