The Allahabad High Court has flagged a contradiction in the stand of three authorities facing contempt proceedings over the demolition of a house in Varanasi, in the face of a status quo order.

All three have denied on affidavit that they demolished anything, while one of them has admitted that he was standing at the spot with police force while the demolition went on.

Justice Vikas Budhwar observed,

“It is quite paradoxical and amazing that though on 11.06.2026, according to the applicant, demolition exercise stood undertaken, but in the affidavit of the opposite party no. 2 in para 14, the presence of the opposite party no. 2 is not being disputed rather admitted that he was standing there on 11.06.2026 and analogy has been drawn that in order to maintain peace and tranquility in the area during demolition, the officers are present.”

The contempt application alleges willful defiance of the order dated 7^th May 2026 passed in Writ-C No. 16633 of 2026. In that writ petition, the applicant had challenged a notice dated 15.04.2026 issued under Section 331(1)(2) of the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959 and had sought a direction restraining the authorities from demolishing or interfering with his possession over House No. 39/12, Dalmandi, Varanasi.

It was argued there that the inspection committee had no architect on it, contrary to Section 331 read with Para 8 of Shirish Chandra and others vs. State of U.P. and others, and that the report had not been supplied with the notice.

Disposing of the petition, the Court had directed that a fresh committee be constituted with at least one independent architect from the approved list, an Executive Engineer and one more Executive Engineer from another department of the State, that it inspect the building under Section 331 and report to the Municipal Commissioner, and that a fresh notice issue along with the inspection report, to which the petitioner could reply within two weeks before the Commissioner decided the matter. Till the exercise was completed, the parties were to maintain status quo.

In the contempt application, the applicant asserted that he filed his objection before the competent authority on 1^st June 2026 and that his premises were forcibly demolished on 11^th June 2026 without the objection being considered.

The first opposite party stated in a compliance affidavit that the Municipal Commissioner constituted a team on 15^th May 2026 with an Executive Engineer of the Varanasi Municipal Corporation, an Executive Engineer of the Public Works Department and an independent registered architect approved by the Varanasi Development Authority, that the joint inspection found the building extremely dilapidated and dangerous, and that a fresh notice under Section 331(1)(2) was issued on 26^th May 2026. No notice under Section 334(3) followed, the Municipal Corporation took no legal action, and the demolition, it was stated, was carried out by another department.

The second opposite party stated that the demolition of 11^th June 2026 was carried out by the Public Works Department for the widening and strengthening of Dalmandi Road, and that he was present at the spot only with police force to maintain law and order. He added that the order of 7^th May 2026 was never supplied to him by the applicant and came to his knowledge only when the contempt court issued notices.

The third opposite party stated that portions of the building sold by Khurshid Alam, Mehtab Alam and Jahangir Alam were removed for construction of the road, nothing was done to the remaining portion belonging to the applicant, and applicant's portion, already dilapidated and vacated by him, collapsed on its own.

“A conjoint reading of the affidavits of the opposite parties no. 1, 2 and 3 show that according to them, no demolition exercise was conducted by them.”

The Court has directed the applicant to respond to all three affidavits. The matter has been listed on 22^nd September 2026.

Case Title: Javed Alam v. Mr. Himanshu Nagpal, Commissioner Of Municipal Corporation And 2 Others

Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Waseem

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Vineet Sankalp

Click Here To Read/Download Order