Apex court berates UP govt for demolition of house in Maharajganj, orders Rs 25 lakh in compensation
Team Clarion
NEW DELHI — ‘This is lawlessness… Walking into somebody’s house and demolishing it without notice,’ the Supreme Court observed on Wednesday coming down heavily on the Uttar Pradesh government for illegally demolishing a house in the Maharajganj town of the state.
The ruling underscores concerns regarding property rights, adherence to due process, and the potential misuse of state power. The incident has sparked a debate on the state’s approach to law enforcement, individual rights, and procedural safeguards.
According to media reports, the apex court reprimanded the BJP-ruled Uttar Pradesh government for demolishing the house without proper notice. The house was bulldozed for the express purpose of widening a road, but the court declared it as high-handedness of the authorities. The court also ordered them to pay the owner Rs 25 lakh as compensation.
The Supreme Court bench presided over by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud issued the ruling while hearing a suo motu writ petition registered in 2020 based on a letter complaint by a Maharajganj resident Manoj Tibrewal Aakash, whose house was demolished in 2019. The three-member bench also comprised Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra.
“This is completely high-handedness. Where is the due process followed? We have the affidavit that says no notice was issued. You only went to the site and informed the people through a loudspeaker,” media reports quoted CJI Chandrachud as saying.
Responding to the argument that Aakash encroached public land, CJI Chandrachud said: “You say that he was an encroacher of 3.7 square metres. We take it. We are not giving him a certificate for it. But how can you start demolishing people’s houses like that?”
“This is lawlessness… walking into somebody’s house and demolishing it without notice,” the CJI added.
The case in question involves the demolition of a private residence in Uttar Pradesh by local authorities. The property owner alleged that the demolition was carried out without prior notice, and with no opportunity to respond, violating both constitutional and legal protections. The petitioner approached the Supreme Court, seeking actions against the UP government’s “arbitrary and retaliatory” measures.
The court noted that demolishing a property without adequate notice contravenes the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness, which are constitutionally guaranteed.
The bench also questioned the motivations behind the demolition, raising suspicions that it may have been a form of retaliation rather than a legitimate enforcement of law.
The court emphasised that the government must adhere to legal protocols and uphold the rights of individuals, stressing that public officials cannot exercise unchecked power.
The Supreme Court’s stern words against the UP government have prompted responses from various quarters. Human rights groups have welcomed the court’s stance, arguing that demolitions without due process are increasingly common and should be checked to prevent misuse of power.
The Supreme Court’s reprimand serves as a warning to authorities regarding the use of demolition as an administrative tool without due consideration of constitutional rights. The judgment reinforces the need for authorities to balance enforcement actions with respect for citizens’ rights. — With inputs from Agencies
