The Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to stay demolition of
"illegal" constructions being carried out across states, observing
that an "omnibus order" cannot be passed restraining the government
authorities from proceeding against unauthorised constructions.
Presiding over a clutch of petitions challenging demolition
drive taken up by various state governments, the top court said "rule of
law" must be followed by everyone.
Refusing to grant any interim stay, a bench of Justices B R
Gavai and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha remarked, "If under the municipal
law the construction is unauthorised, can an omnibus order be passed to
restrain the authorities?"
The court listed the matter for August 10 for resumed hearing.
The Centre argued that participation in riots does not immune
someone from having one's unauthorised construction demolished.
Contending that an unnecessary hype is being created about
the issue, solicitor general Tushar Mehta argued that the authorities have been
following due procedures before demolishing unauthorised structures.
Appearing on behalf of the petitioners, senior advocate
Dushyant Dave alleged that the state authorities have been picking and choosing
action against one particular community. "Demolition of houses merely
because somebody is accused of a crime is not acceptable in our society,"
he argued. "We are governed by the rule of law."
One of the petitioners is Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, a Muslim body.
Responding to its petition, the Uttar Pradesh government in
an affidavit filed last month had said the demolitions were not related to
punishing the accused involved in violent protests following remarks by two BJP
leaders on Prophet Mohammed.
Stating that the demolition has been carried out
in accordance with law, the Yogi Adityanath-led government had told the top
court that none of the actual affected parties, if any, have approached the
court in connection with the demolition.
"The said demolitions, referred to in the interlocutory
applications, have been carried out by the local development authority, which
are statutory autonomous bodies, independent of the state administration, as
per law as part of their routine effort against unauthorised/illegal
constructions and encroachments, in accordance with the UP Urban Planning and
Development Act, 1972," the government's affidavit said.
Questioning the locus standi of the petitioners, the UP
government said, "Even if any such alleged demolition action is to be
challenged, the same is to be done by the affected party before the high court,
and not this court."
The affidavit said the government takes strong exception to
the attempt by the petitioners to name the highest constitutional functionaries
of the state and falsely colour the local development authority's lawful
actions as "extra-legal punitive measures" against the accused
persons, targeting any religious community.
It described all the allegations as "absolutely
false".
……………………….