UP Demolition Drive: SC adjourns hearing on Jamiat-Ulama-I-Hind plea

Supreme Court today postponed a hearing on a petition brought by Jamiat-Ulema-i-Hind asking for instructions to the Uttar Pradesh authorities to make sure that no more property demolitions be carried out in the state without following due procedure until July 13.

The hearing was postponed today by the Vacation Bench of Justice Suryakant and JB Pradiwala after it was noted that the concerned party had already gone to the Allahabad High Court, where it was heard yesterday and another hearing was planned for tomorrow. Additionally, Parveen Fatima, the harmed party and Javed Mohammed’s wife, has stated her desire to pursue her own lawsuit.

Supreme Court was previously assured by the Uttar Pradesh government that recent property demolitions in the state were done legally and had nothing to do with prosecuting those who had been charged with rioting. The UP government claimed that the government had prosecuted rioters in accordance with a distinct set of legislation.

“The unlawful building was only dismantled by the Prayagraj Development Authority on June 12, 2022, after following due process of law and given ample opportunity, and the same had no relevance to the incidence of rioting,” the UP government claimed.

In answer to Jamiat Ulama-I- Hind request about the current demolition drive in Uttar Pradesh, the UP government submitted an affidavit. In its affidavit, the Uttar Pradesh government pleaded with the court to reject the Jamiat Ulama-I- Hind motion on the grounds that it lacks substance.

However, UP Govt accused the petitioner of cherry-picking examples, including one involving the demolition of Javed Mohammed’s home in Prayagraj, claiming that the procedure against that claimed illegal building had been started far before any rioting happened.

Through an affidavit, the Uttar Pradesh government claimed that when it comes to taking action against those guilty of rioting, the State government is doing so harshly and in accordance with a totally separate set of laws.

UP government has also informed the top court that recent demolitions have been completed by the Local Development Authorities, which are statutory autonomous bodies, independent of the State administration, in accordance with the law as part of their routine effort against unauthorized/illegal constructions and encroachments, in accordance with the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1972.

The Uttar Pradesh Government has strongly rejected the petitioner Jamiat Ulama-I-attempt Hind’s to identify the State’s highest constitutional officials and falsely characterise the local development authority’s lawful actions that are in complete compliance with the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, as “extra-legal punitive measures” against accused individuals that are directed at any specific religious community.

The Uttar Pradesh government was previously directed by the Supreme Court to respond to arguments made by the Jamiat-Ulama-I-Hind and to follow the legal procedure while demolishing any illegal constructions.

Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind has submitted a request asking for instructions to be given to the State of Uttar Pradesh not to take any precipitous action against any accused person’s home or business as an extralegal punitive punishment in any criminal trial.

Any demolition effort that the authorities are going to carry out in the Kanpur District should be postponed while the current writ suit is pending, according to a plea made by the group Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind.