Gurugram Demolitions: Punjab & Haryana High Court Permits Action Against Encroachments, Says Due Process Must Be Followed

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has permitted Haryana Government to proceed with the removal of encroachments in Gurugram that are found to be in violation of municipal laws, while underscoring that such action must strictly adhere to due process.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan representing Gurugram residents made an oral mentioning in the Supreme Court today highlighting ongoing demolition drive targeting “stilt plus four” buildings in Gurugram.

The High Court in April had put interim stay on the “stilt plus four” policy which allows construction of four individual floors above a parking level (stilt) on residential plots, aiming to increase housing supply in urban areas. Observing that "the State appeared to prioritise revenue over public safety while ignoring basic infrastructure realities" the High Court had stayed the policy.

Following this the Haryana Government authorities issued a directive dated April 16, 2026, interpreting the order as authorizing immediate demolition of boundary walls, ramps and green areas across multiple residential sectors. The petitioners contended that the High Court had merely stayed the operation of the policy notification and had not directed any demolition or anti-encroachment action.

Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry today said, "We allow the state authorities to remove all the encroachments and violations of the municipal law following the due process of law."

Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan appearing for Residents of Sector 31, Gurugram submitted that the authorities are referring to order wherein policy have been stayed by the Court to justify the demolition. Demolitions have started in different sectors and trees have been uprooted, he added.

Counsel appearing for the State Government observed that the intention of its policy was that the people could park their vehicles within their boundary. But they are still parking on the road, he added.

Chief Justice turning to the petitioner said, "I think you are aware what happens in Gurugram during Monsoon...something drastic has to be done."

The Court clarified that the interim order passed staying the “stilt plus four” policy is only with respect to Gurugram district and prospective in nature.

While allowing the authorities to take action against encroachments, the Court asked to give prior notice before any demolition.

Asking petitioners to conclude their arguments in a time bound manner, the plea was adjourned.

Title: Sunil Singh v. State of Haryana and ors.