Lucknow Fire Tragedy | Allahabad High Court Seeks Comprehensive Reply From UP Govt As State Says Fire Safety SOP 'Almost Ready'

The Allahabad High Court has sought a comprehensive response from the UP Government in the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea concerning the Lucknow coaching centre devastating fire tragedy that claimed 15 lives in June this year, after the State informed the Court that the proposed Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) on fire safety is "almost ready".

Recording the submission made by the State, a Bench of Justice Rajan Roy and Justice Manjive Shukla granted 1 week's time for filing the counter affidavits.

However, the Bench made it clear that the affidavits must address all the issues raised in the writ petition and those referred to in the Court's July 2 order, cautioning that "Evasive reply will not be accepted".

Since the parents of the victims have filed an intervention application in the matter, the Court has allowed the State and other opposite parties to respond.

The matter has been directed to be listed afresh on August 24, 2026. The PIL plea has been filed by practising Advocate Shivendu Pandey.

Hearing the case on July 2, the Court had expressed its deep anguish over the loss of at least 15 lives in the devastating fire incident. The Court had directed the UP government to come up with a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to prevent such tragedies and hold defaulting officers accountable.

Flagging the inaction of the authorities in the present case, the Court had observed that officials "spring into action" immediately after such casualties, but their promptness soon dies down.

"The matters are also brought to the notice of the Court...and the Courts also take cognizance of the same, but, after some time, the promptness which was reflected immediately after the incident, dies, and again, fresh incidents of fire, take place, resulting in further injury and casualty".

The Court also expressed dissatisfaction with the State's submission that Section 26 of the Uttar Pradesh Fire and Emergency Services Act, 2022, exempts multi-storey buildings having a height of less than 15 metres from obtaining a fire safety certificate.

The Bench observed that the Aliganj incident itself showed why the statutory exemption required reconsideration, as the building where the fire occurred was below the prescribed height.

The Court observed:

"If it is so, then from the incident which has taken place in a building which was less than 15 meters, the provision contained in the aforesaid Act exempting such buildings from obtaining fire safety certificates, needs to be revisited, as this incident itself proves the provision to be unreasonable, prima facie. All the relevant provisions in this regard need to be revisited by the State Government".

The High Court was informed that although the building map had been sanctioned strictly for residential purposes, a commercial building was constructed and commercial activities were being carried on from the premises.

The Bench also noted that an order directing the demolition of the basement construction for violating the sanctioned building plan had been passed on May 10, 2016, but was subsequently cancelled/withdrawn on July 5, 2016.

The Court further noted that even after the withdrawal of the demolition order, the construction did not conform to the sanctioned plan.

Questioning why the authorities failed to stop the illegal construction while it was underway, the Bench recorded the State's submission that no action had been taken at the relevant time.

"On being further asked as to why construction was not stopped while it was underway illegally and why suitable action under the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 not taken at the appropriate time, as, had it been taken, loss of lives would have been prevented, learned counsel submitted that the fact is that no action was taken".

The Bench had also examined the role of the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited (UPPCL) and Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (MVVNL).

It was informed that while a 2 KV residential electricity connection had originally been granted in 2016, a commercial connection was subsequently issued and later enhanced to 20 KV on the strength of a No Objection Certificate granted by the Director of Electrical Safety.

Questioning how a premises sanctioned for residential use came to be granted a commercial electricity connection and enhanced electrical load, the Court observed that proper scrutiny at that stage could have averted the tragedy.

"If at that very stage, proper scrutiny had been made by the concerned officials, then this unfortunate incident which took place subsequently, would not have occurred".

The Court had observed that it was for the State Government to answer how these apparent illegalities were regularised.

In related news, the Supreme Court has taken serious note of the Lucknow coaching centre tragedy and issued a contempt notice to the Vice-Chairman of the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) for alleged non-compliance with its directions to identify and act against residential premises being misused for non-residential purposes.