'Bulldozer' Petition: SC Grants Three Days To UP Government To File Affidavit In Application Filed By Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind

A bench of Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Vikram Nath has granted three days-time to the State of UP to file their affidavit in the latest ‘bulldozer’ case.

The vacation bench was hearing an application filed by Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, seeking directions to the State of Uttar Pradesh to ensure that no further demolitions are carried out in the state without following due process.

The applications are filed in its earlier petition against the demolition drive in Delhi's Jahangirpuri. Another bench of the Supreme Court had on 21 April issued notice and directed status quo against the demolition drive launched by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation (NDMC) in Delhi’s Jahangirpuri area.

In the matter, the applicant sought directions to initiate action against officials responsible for the houses demolished, allegedly in violation of the rule of law and the municipal laws enacted by the State of Uttar Pradesh.

According to this report in Live Law, "relief in the application filed through Advocate Kabir Dixit and Advocate Sarim Naved had also sought directions to the State of Uttar Pradesh that no precipitative action be taken in Kanpur District against the residential or commercial property of any accused in any criminal proceedings as an extra-legal punitive measure".

Chander Uday Singh, appearing for the petitioner argued that as per Section 27 of the UP Urban Planning Act, a notice of not less than a period of 15 days has to be given to the person responsible or owner.

Singh stated that after the violence in Kanpur, a number of persons in authority have stated in the media that the properties of suspects/accused would be confiscated and demolished, including, according to him, the Chief Minister of the state who said in the media ‘that the houses of accused persons would be razed using bulldozers’.

He submitted, “This is appalling. We haven't seen this in this country, not during Emergency not in pre-independence India. Not just person's house, houses of their parents etc are demolished. This can’t be countenanced in a Republic and in a country with rule of law."

The State of UP however opposed the applications, primarily arguing that Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind has no locus standi in the matter. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that since there is allegation of violation of laws, some aggrieved party has to come forward, stating that demolition action was taken against it, without issuing notice, as vendetta for their involvement in the riots.

To this, the Court responded, “We've to be conscious of the fact that those people whose houses are demolished may not be able to approach the Court."

However, Harish Salve, appearing for the government, pointed out that in Prayagraj the notice was issued in May, much before the riots and subsequently on 25 May the demolition order was passed.

He also remarked that the said property is valuable and therefore the petitioners are not those who could not approach the court. He sought three days' time to put the records on affidavit.

The State argued that an umbrella order restricting demolitions in the State of UP should NOT be passed. The argument of the State was that since the matter concerns an individual, whose house has been demolished, the court should hear the State side and then pass any judgment. The State requested three days-time for filing its affidavit showcasing that the notice was served well within the statutory timeframe.

The bench agreed and gave three days to the State to file its affidavit and has listed the matter for Tuesday, 21 June.

Also Read: 'Blasphemy' Row: How Himanta Biswa Sarma Prevented Violent Protests From Breaking Out In Assam