Supreme Court: One More Case Of Bulldozer Justice; Development Authority Has Forgotten That Rule Of Law Prevails In Our Country
The Supreme Court directed the Prayagraj Development Authority to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation to individuals whose residential structures were illegally demolished.
While remarking on the “bulldozer justice” cases happening in the Country, the Supreme Court stated that the officers of the development authority have forgotten that the rule of law prevails in our Country.
The Court decided on the illegal demolition of residential structures belonging to six individuals, including a member of the Bar and a professor whose library was destroyed. It directed the Prayagraj Development Authority (PDA) to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation to each of them. The Court noted that the demolition of the residential buildings was carried out illegally and in a high-handed manner.
A Bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan held, “Therefore, the demolition action is completely illegal, which violates the appellants' right to shelter guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The action is completely arbitrary. Moreover, carrying out demolition of residential structures in such a highhanded manner shows insensitivity on the part of the statutory development authority. This is one more case of bulldozer justice. The officers of the PDA have forgotten that the rule of law prevails in our country. Unfortunately, the State Government has supported the PDA.”
Senior Advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari represented the Appellants, while Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani appeared for the Respondents.
Brief Facts
On March 1, 2021, a demolition notice was issued and served on the Appellants on March 6, 2021, with the demolition carried out the next day, March 7, 2021, without providing them a reasonable opportunity to present their case before the appellate authority under Section 27(2) of the UP Urban Planning Act.
One of the Appellants is a member of the Bar, while another is a professor whose entire library was demolished, leaving them displaced. Additionally, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the Petition by relying on a letter dated September 15, 2020, which was presented in Court without allowing the Appellants to challenge its contents.
By an earlier Order, the Court permitted the reconstruction of the demolished houses, on the condition that the Appellants provide an undertaking to demolish them if their appeals were dismissed. However, the Appellants informed the Court that they lacked the financial means to rebuild.
Court’s Reasoning
The Supreme Court referenced its previous judgment, In Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of structures, which laid down the law regarding service of notice in demolition cases. It was held that “No demolition should be carried out without a prior show cause notice returnable either in accordance with the time provided by the local municipal laws or within 15 days' time from the date of service of such notice, whichever is later.”
The Court explained, “The officers of the PDA must understand that before a structure is demolished, every possible effort should be made to effect a proper service of the show-cause notice. It is their duty to do so. Moreover, after proper and effective service of the order of demolition, at least 15 days’ time must be provided to the owner or occupier to avail the remedy of an Appeal under Section 27(2) of the 1973 Act.”
“The residential structures of citizens cannot be demolished in such a summary manner without following the principles of natural justice,” the Bench remarked.
Consequently, the Court ordered, “We, therefore, set aside the impugned order dated 8 th March, 2021, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and dispose of these appeals by passing the following order: 1) We direct the PDA to scrupulously follow the directions in the decision of this Court in Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of structures…We direct the PDA to pay costs of Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees ten lakhs) in each appeal to the appellants within a period of six weeks from today.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court disposed of the Appeal.
Cause Title: Zulfiquar Haider & Anr. v. State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 480)
Appearance:
Appellants: Senior Advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari; AOR Rooh-e-hina Dua and Syed Mehdi Imam; Advocates Atif Suhrawardy, Shamama Anis, Tabrez Ahmad and Pankaj Kumar
Respondents: Attorney General for India R. Venkataramani; ASG Aishwarya Bhati and Ruchir Ranjan Rai; Senior Advocates Yatindra Singh and Shyan Divan; AOR Kamlendra Mishra and Parmanand Gaur; Advocates Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Ashiwan Mishra, Vibhav Mishra, Shaurya R Rai and Megha Gaur