Live
- 2024 on track to be hottest year on record
- PM Modi’s visit to Solapur: Women applaud ‘Double-Engine’ government’s initiatives
- Nagarkurnool MLA Dr. Kuchukulla Rajesh Reddy Campaigning in Maharashtra Elections
- Wife Kills Husband with Her Lover: Details of Veldanda Murder Case Revealed by SP Gaikwad
- Strict Action on Violations of Food Rights: Telangana Food Commission Chairman Goli Srinivas Reddy
- Smooth Conduct of Group-3 Exams with Strict Security Measures: Collector Badavath Santosh
- Delhi HC orders cancellation of LOC issued against Ashneer Grover, wife
- Shami’s absence a major blow for India in BGT, says Paul Adams
- Will organize protests at borders if attack on minority Hindus in Bangladesh not stopped: Bengal LoP
- Dutch Ambassador Marisa Gerard Meets Telangana CM A. Revanth Reddy in Delhi
SC rejects bulldozer plea against 3 states
'Those affected by demolitions can come to court'
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain a plea alleging contempt of its order on demolition of properties by the authorities in Uttarakhand, Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai, P K Mishra and K V Viswanathan said it was not inclined to entertain the plea filed by the petitioner who was not directly or indirectly related to the alleged act. "We don't want to open a pandora's box," said the bench, adding, "Let the persons who are affected by demolition come to the court". The petitioner's counsel alleged the authorities in Haridwar, Jaipur and Kanpur had demolished properties in contempt of the apex court's order which had said demolition would not be carried out without its permission. "The Supreme Court's order was categorical that without the leave of this court, no demolition would be carried out," the counsel said.
He alleged in one of these cases, the property was demolished soon after an FIR was lodged. Additional Solicitor-General K M Nataraj, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, said the petitioner was a third party and unaware of the facts as it was only a footpath encroachment removed by the authorities. He said the petitioner had moved court based on some media reports. The bench observed refused to entertain the plea observing the petitioner was not directly or indirectly affected by the action. The petitioner's counsel said in two of the three cases, the affected persons were in jail.
The bench, however, noted the family members of affected persons, who were in jail, could approach the court. "People who are suffering often don't have access to court," said the counsel.
The bench thereafter remarked, “Please don’t say that. There are public-spirited citizens everywhere”. The top court further said if somebody’s property had been demolished, they could approach the court, and the bench would hear it.
The top court had earlier reserved its verdict on a batch of petitions raising the plea that properties, including those belonging to persons accused of crimes, were being demolished in several states. The apex court had on September 17 ordered no demolition will take place across the country till October 1 without its permission.
However, it had clarified that the order would not apply to unauthorised structures on public roads, footpaths, railway lines, and water bodies. On October 1, the apex court had reserved its verdict in the matter saying until further orders, its September 17 interim order would operate. It had then suggested framing of pan-India guidelines on the demolition of properties and said religious structures in the middle of a road -- be it a ‘dargah’ (shrine) or a temple -- had to go as public interest was paramount. A person being an accused or a convict was not a ground to demolish properties, it had said.
