On Wednesday (November 6), the Supreme Court slammed authorities in the state of Uttar Pradesh for illegally demolishing houses for a road widening project.

The Court was hearing a suo motu writ petition registered in 2020 based on a complaint letter sent by Manoj Tibrewal Aakash, whose house in Maharajganj district was demolished in 2019.

During the hearing, the court composed of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra He expressed his serious dissatisfaction with the conduct of the authorities, describing their actions as “arrogant.”

Responding to the State’s argument that the petitioner had encroached on public land, CJI Chandrachud said:

“You say he invaded 3.7 square meters. We accept it, we don’t give him a certificate for it. But how can you start demolishing people’s houses like that? This is illegal… entering someone’s house and demolish it. without notice.”

Pointing out that due process was not notified or followed, the CJI added:

“This is completely arrogant! Where is due process followed? We have the affidavit that says no notice was issued, you just went to the site and informed people over a loudspeaker.”

The court was informed that 123 other buildings were also demolished and people were only informed through public announcements.

“This is very arrogant” Justice Pardiwala observed. “You can’t come in with bulldozers and demolish houses overnight. You don’t give the family time to leave. What about the household items? Due process has to be followed.” Justice Pardiwala added.

Justice Pardiwala also expressed his disapproval that the authorities gave notice only through a public announcement and the beating of drums.

“You cannot simply tell people to vacate houses and demolish them with a drumbeat. There has to be proper notice.”

The court was based on a report from the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) that in the highest part there was an invasion of 3.70 square meters but that it was not justification to demolish the entire house. The NHRC recommended grant of interim compensation to the petitioner, registration of FIR on the petitioner’s complaint and initiation of departmental/punitive action against the officers.

The Court noted that the authorities did not carry out any investigation to demarcate the encroachments. Furthermore, there was no material to prove that the land was acquired before the demolitions were carried out.

The State has not disclosed the precise extent of encroachment, the width of the existing road, the width of the notified road, the extent of the petitioner’s property which fell within the notified width of the center line of the road, the Court noted. The Court also questioned why the demolition was carried out beyond the alleged encroachment.

“It is clear that the demolition was completely arbitrary and without the authority of the law,” the bank noted in its order.

The petitioner alleged that the demolition was retaliation in response to a report he published in a local newspaper about wrongdoing by authorities. The court did not express any observations on this accusation.

Therefore, the Court directed the State to pay punitive compensation of Rs 25 lakh to the petitioner. This compensation is provisional in nature and would not prevent the petitioner from adopting other legal procedures to obtain compensation.

The Court further directed the UP Chief Secretary to conduct an investigation against all officials and contractors responsible for the illegal demolitions and initiate disciplinary action. The Court clarified that the State is also free to initiate criminal actions against those responsible for illegal actions. The instructions must be fulfilled within one month.

The ruling also laid out the steps that state authorities must follow before removing encroachments for road widening projects. The copy of the judgment was ordered to be distributed to all the states and territories of the Union.

Senior advocate Siddharth Bhatnagar represented the petitioner.

Case: IN RE MANOJ TIBREWAL AKASH WP(C) No. 1294/2020