The Supreme Court has stung the Uttar Pradesh government in a big way over demolishing residential structures at Prayagraj, that took shock over this manner of action. The thundering comments of apex court surround the demolition case, open up concerns on due process and much more how state will deal in such issues.
The Supreme Court hit the UP government for what the court termed irresponsible demolition in Prayagraj. The judiciary has conveyed its anxiety over the all too apparent disregard for norms of regularities and rights as people whose properties lie in the f ray were demolished.
The judges laid down that anyone should not be summarily deprived his property unless he has been given full liberty to use the proper legal means before any such action are taken. That were the most graphic observations from court side, particularly when it came to the approach of the state choosing not to let there be municipal formalities before demolitions took place. The Supreme Court, however, said that such illegal constructions are being used as a fig leaf for punitive demolitions and called for an honest process where people living or working illegally can have opportunity to be at the public meeting before any demolition takes place.
Also check:- Increased LoC Tensions Amid Army Chief’s Visit
This has been getting a lot of scrutiny, especially with all of the properties allegedly in relation to people like property Atiq Ahmed being demolished. While the court did not name any parties by name, its hardline words against demolitions and abuses in Prayagraj are what ultimately speaks louder about its concern for rule of law.
It is a strong reminder that the Supreme Court is appalled at what it views as state-government complicities in regard to the basic rights of people owning property and their humane concern. That the court used the words ‘shocked our conscience’ is a direct indication of the immense displeasure it has over the way demolitions happened.
Legal experts feel that scorching comments of the apex court will alter the dynamic for a long time to come when it comes to property reconstructions in UP and its administration. It would compel the state to look into its consitutent mechanisms and ensure that such matters are dealt with in a legal way and with legality. The intervention of the court is an important reiteration on the rule of law and protecting human rights even in matters regarding possible illegal occupation.
The matter is to be dealt with further by referring to the UP government, as there are more
issues to be analysed.
