'Go To HC': Supreme Court Disposes Of Contempt Petition Filed Against UP Authorities Over Demolition Of Property At Sambhal

Granting liberty to approach the Allahabad High Court, the Supreme Court today disposed of a contempt petition filed against Uttar Pradesh authorities for alleged violation of order dated November 13, 2024 restraining demolition actions across the country without prior notice and opportunity of hearing.

A bench of Justices BR Gavai and K Vinod Chandran passed the order, stating,

"We find that the issue can be best addressed by the jurisdictional High Court. We therefore dispose of the present petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional High Court."

Although the petitioner's counsel urged the Court to direct that in the meantime, no third-party rights may be created in the subject property, the bench declined to pass any such direction. "File before the High Court. In the judgment itself, we have given liberty...we have issued all necessary directions...in case there is any breach, the jurisdictional High Court will be entitled to entertain", said Justice Gavai.

Briefly put, the petitioner claimed that a part of his property, situated at Sambhal, was demolished by authorities between January 10 and 11, 2025 without any prior notice or hearing, despite the Court's clear directions. As per claims, the property (a factory) was the petitioner and his family's sole source of income and as such, the action of the authorities jeopardized their source of livelihood.

Supreme Court order alleged to have been violated

On November 13, 2024, the Supreme Court held that the executive cannot demolish the houses/properties of persons only on the ground that they are accused or convicted in a crime. A set of guidelines - to be followed before demolition - were issued by the Court. These included -

(i) No demolition should be carried out without prior show cause notice returnable either in accordance with the time provided in the local municipal laws or within 15 days time from the date of service, whichever is later.

(ii) Designated authority shall give an opportunity of personal hearing to the aggrieved party. The minutes of such a hearing shall be recorded. The final order of authority shall contain contentions of noticee, the findings of the authority and reasons, as to whether the unauthorized construction is compoundable, and whether the whole construction is to be demolished. The order should specify why the extreme step of demolition is the only option available.

(iii) After the orders of demolition are passed, the affected party needs to be given some time so as to challenge the order of demolition before the appropriate forum.

The Court also held that violation of the directions would lead to initiation of contempt proceedings in addition to prosecution. If a demolition is found to be in violation of the orders of the Court, the officers responsible will be held liable for restitution of the demolished property at their personal cost in addition to payment of damages.

Further, the Court clarified that that the directions would not be applicable if the unauthorized structure was in any public place such as road, street, footpath, abutting railway lines or any river body or water body and also in cases where there is an order passed by a Court of law.

Case Title: MOHAMMED GHAYOOR v. RAJENDER PENSIYA AND ORS., Diary No.2651 of 2025