“Action will only be in accordance with law," the Supreme Court said on Thursday, 16 June, as it asked the Uttar Pradesh government to refrain from carrying out any demolition except in accordance with the procedure established by law.
The plea challenging the recent spate of demolitions in Uttar Pradesh is being heard by a vacation bench of Justices AS Bopanna and Vikram Nath. It has been listed for further hearing on Tuesday, 21 June, by which date the state is expected to file an affidavit presenting its stand.
The apex court, however, did say that it cannot stay the demolitions, but can instruct the state to do it in accordance with the law.
Justice Bopanna, also orally remarked:
"Demolitions can't take place without notice, we are conscious of that."
Observing that “when someone has a grievance they have a right to have it addressed,” the court stated that the respondents will get time for their objections, but in the meantime “we should ensure their safety.”
“Let us be clear, they are also part of society,” the court said.
In response to the contention of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta – who is representing the state of UP – that if the allegation is that laws were violated in the process, then some aggrieved party has to come forward and state the same, Justice Bopanna said:
"We have to be conscious of the fact that those people whose houses are demolished may not be able to approach the court.”
The court, however, did not pass any interim order on Thursday.
The Plea Before the Supreme Court
The plea being heard by the apex court challenges the recent demolition drive in Uttar Pradesh that targetted the properties of those alleged to have been involved in the violence on 10 June over Nupur Sharma's remarks against Prophet Muhammad.
The petition, filed by Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind, seeks direction from the court that no further demolitions of residential or commercial properties are carried out without following due process.
The plea also seeks directions to ensure that a demolition exercise of any nature must be carried out strictly in accordance with applicable laws and only after due notice and opportunity of hearing given to each affected person, reported LiveLaw.
This comes after a spree of bulldozer action against those allegedly involved in communal violence, in various states including Delhi and Madhya Pradesh.
The petition points out:
According to Section 10 of the Uttar Pradesh (Regulation of Building Operations) Act of 1958, a building can be demolished only after the affected persons have been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
According to Section 27 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, the affected persons are required to be heard and given 15 days notice, before the demolition actually takes place. The person aggrieved by the demolition order can also file an appeal against it before the chairman within a 30-day period
Thereby, it goes on to contend that these legal provisions were not followed with respect to the above-mentioned demolitions.
What Did the Petitioners Tell the Court?
Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate CU Singh dubbed the recent developments “shocking and appalling circumstances not even seen during Emergency."
He also contended:
The demolitions have taken place “taking advantage” of the fact that notice was issued but interim relief (stay on demolitions in UP) was not granted previously by the apex court when it passed an order seeking maintenance of status quo in Jahangirpuri (Delhi).
The demolitions have been justified with allegations of the constructions (since razed) being illegal.
In accordance with the UP Act, properties can be demolished only if no action has been taken for 40 days.
What Did the State Say?
Appearing for the state of Uttar Pradesh, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, on his part, claimed:
No legal structure was demolished.
Procedures were followed.
The petitioner’s claim that rule of law was not followed is “based on totally irrelevant submissions made by a political party.”
“In the entire country, saying follow the Constitution cannot be argument for all relief.”
Meanwhile, senior Advocate Harish Salve, also representing the state of UP, reiterated that due process was followed. Thereby, he sought time from the court to place the state’s stand in an affidavit.
Demolitions in UP
Thursday's Supreme Court hearing comes in light of the recent spate of demolition drives being carried out by the Uttar Pradesh administration in Prayagraj and Kanpur, citing "illegal constructions."
On Sunday, 12 June, the home in which Javed Mohammad — an accused in connection with the unrest in Prayagraj — lived with his hamily was demolished by state government authorities over claims that the property was illegal.
In Saharanpur, the houses of two accused, Muzammil and Abdul Waqir, were also razed with bulldozers by the municipal corporation.
Mohammad's family and lawyer have termed the demolition to be illegal while producing tax receipts for the house and alleging breach of protocol in serving notice to the family ahead of the demolition.
The UP Police has so far arrested 357 people from nine districts in connection with violence that had erupted following Friday prayers on 10 June.
(With inputs from LiveLaw.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)