Allahabad High Highlights ‘Flouting Order’ Culture While Issuing Notice To Officials For Carrying Out Demolition Violating Interim Order
The petition before the Allahabad High Court was filed by an aggrieved litigant whose house was demolished despite the existence of an interim order prohibiting the same.
Justice JJ Munir, Allahabad High Court
In a case where demolitions were carried out in violation of the Court’s interim order, the Allahabad High Court has observed that the Police and Civil administration seem to find pride in flouting judicial orders, which gives them a sense of achievement. The High Court also issued notice to the Collector, Sub Divisional Magistrate and the Tehsildar.
The petition before the High Court was filed by an aggrieved litigant whose house was demolished despite the existence of an interim order prohibiting the same.
The Single Bench of Justice J.J. Munir observed, “There seems to have come about a culture amongst the Executive Officers of the State, particularly, those in the Police and Civil administration to find a kind of pride in flouting judicial orders. It seems to give them a sense of achievement, rather than make them feel the guilt of being offenders. This matter cannot be taken lightly. It is well settled that any action done, whatever be its nature in violation of a judicial order, is a nullity”.
Advocate Vikrant Rana represented the Petitioner, while Chief Standing Counsel represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The petitioner alleged encroachment by the fifth respondent. An order of eviction was passed under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006, by the Tehsildar against which the appeal, preferred by the petitioner, was dismissed. A public interest litigation was filed by one Rakesh in the public interest, seeking the removal of encroachment. The High Court had sought a personal affidavit in the matter by the Collector, Baghpat, indicating as to why the eviction orders had not been carried out.
The petitioner, mindful of the order passed in Public Interest Litigation, mentioned the matter before the Judge hearing the writ petition arising out of orders under Section 67 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006. The Court ordered no demolition of the constructions of the petitioner and no recovery to be made. In the present writ petition, the petitioner moved an application under Article 215 of the Constitution, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the Court to punish the opposite parties i.e. the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil-Sadar, Revenue Inspector and Lekhpal posted at Baghpat for willfully disobeying the interim order and continuing with the demolition.
Reasoning
On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that the photographs showed that the order was well within the knowledge of the respondent-authorities, and yet they went ahead with the demolition. “The demolition is a physical act, which once accomplished, leaves only two choices to the Court to undo the wrong. One is, award of damages, and the other is restitution. The restitution would be by reconstruction of the demolished building”, it held.
Noting that the building was constructed in the Harijan abadi and was not a construction in some kind of a public utility land, the Bench said, “Therefore, in our opinion, this might be a case, where restitution ought be ordered, requiring the State to reconstruct.”
The Bench issued notice to the Collector, District Baghpat, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tehsil-Sadar, District Baghpat and the Tehsildar, Tehsil-Sadar, District Baghpat, requiring each of them to file their affidavit explaining as to why the building demolished in violation of the interim order should not be ordered to be reconstructed by them and restored to its original shape at Government costs.
The matter has now been listed on July 7, 2025, along with the Public Interest Litigation.
Cause Title: Smt. Chhama v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others (Case No.: WRIT - C No. 7339 of 2025)
Appearance
Petitioner: Advocate Vikrant Rana
Respondent: Chief Standing Counsel, Advocate Sunil Kumar Singh
