New Delhi, Calling the demolition of residential homes in Prayagraj “inhuman and illegal”, the Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered the city development authority to pay ₹10 lakh compensation to each aggrieved house owner within six weeks.
“The manner in which the demolition has taken place shocks our conscience. Residences of the appellants have been high-handedly demolished. There is something called right to shelter, due process of law,” said a bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan.
The bench said the “high handed” manner of the demolitions showed insensitivity on the part of authority while underlining the “rule of the law in the country”.
Residential structures of citizens cannot be demolished in such fashion, it added.
The apex court said the Prayagraj Development Authority must remember right to shelter is an integral part of Article 21 and there is a rule of law which is basic part of the Constitution.
The top court said the demolition was carried out by the authority under Section 27 of the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973.
The bench observed a showcause notice was issued on December 18, 2020, and pasted on the houses the same day, with the remark that on two occasions attempts had been made to serve it in person.
The court said a subsequent order of demolition was also affixed on January 8, 2021, but not sent by the registered post.
“The first registered post communication was sent on March 1, 2021, received on March 6, 2021, and the demolition was carried out the next day, leaving the appellants with no opportunity to appeal under Section 27 of the Act,” the bench said.
The top court went on, “The object of the proviso to Section 27 is to provide a reasonable opportunity to showcause before demolition. This is no way of granting a reasonable opportunity.”
As per provisions, the bench said, genuine efforts should be made to serve notice in person before resorting to affixture.
“When the provision talks about a person who cannot be found, it is obvious that genuine efforts are required to be made for affecting service in person. It cannot be that the person entrusted with the job of serving notice goes to the house and affixes it after finding that on that day the person concerned is not available,” it said.
The order observed it was “obvious that repeated efforts have to be made” to make a personal service.
“Only if those efforts fail then there are two options available. One is of affixing and second is of sending by registered post,” the bench added.
During the hearing, the petitioners’ counsel sought compensation saying his clients lacked the financial means to reconstruct their homes.
Attorney general R Venkataramani opposed grant of money while arguing illegality couldn’t be compensated and maintaining the affected individuals had alternate accommodations.
The court, however, refused to accept the argument which it said was a “justification for denying due process”.
“They have lost their houses due to this. You must make sincere efforts to serve the notice and not just affix it randomly. This affixing business must stop. Only because they don’t have money, they are suffering,” it said.
The apex court had previously slammed the Uttar Pradesh government for the demolition action in Prayagraj without following a due legal procedure and said it sent a “shocking and wrong signal”.
The petitioners’ counsel had said the state government wrongly demolished the houses believing the land belonged to gangster-politician Atiq Ahmed, who was killed in 2023 in a police encounter.
The top court was hearing a plea by advocate Zulfiqar Haider, professor Ali Ahmed and others, whose houses were demolished.
The Allahabad High Court had rejected their plea challenging the demolition. The petitioners had been reportedly served a notice on March 6, 2021 with respect to certain constructions at Lukerganj in Prayagraj district.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.