Delhi High Court Closes Pleas After MCD Assures No Demolition Without Prior Notice In Uttam Nagar Case

Justice Amit Bansal recorded the statement made by the civic body and disposed of the pleas filed by residents who had approached the Court fearing immediate demolition of their homes following a recent clash in the area.

The assurance was given during the hearing of petitions filed by Jarina, the mother of one of the accused, and Shahnaz, whose children were questioned by the police in connection with the incident.

The petitioners had expressed apprehension that their houses in JJ Colony, Uttam Nagar, could be demolished without following due process of law.

Senior advocate Sanjay Poddar, appearing for the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, submitted before the Court that no action would be taken against the properties in question without issuing prior notice to the occupants.

He further assured the Court that any action, if undertaken, would be in accordance with the legal framework and in compliance with the directions laid down by the Supreme Court governing demolition proceedings.

The Court took note of this undertaking and closed the matter. However, it clarified that the assurance was limited to the specific residential premises involved in the present petitions.

The case arose in the aftermath of a violent clash between two neighbouring families in Uttam Nagar on March 4 during Holi celebrations, which led to the death of a 26 year old man.

Following the incident, several individuals, including a minor, were apprehended by the police in connection with the case.

Tensions escalated further when, on March 8, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi carried out a demolition drive in the area and razed a portion of a house belonging to the family of one of the accused. The civic body stated that the structure had been built over a public drain.

This action led to widespread concern among other residents in the locality, who feared that similar demolition measures could be taken against their homes.

Earlier, on March 11, the High Court had granted interim protection to the petitioners by restraining any demolition for a period of one week and directing them to file detailed petitions outlining their grievances.

In their pleas, the petitioners argued that there was a real and immediate threat of “arbitrary and illegal” demolition without adherence to procedural safeguards.

They contended that demolition cannot be used as a punitive measure in criminal cases and must follow due process, including the issuance of a show cause notice and an opportunity to be heard.

Jarina, in particular, submitted that the earlier demolition had created an atmosphere of fear and insecurity among residents in the area.

On the other hand, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi had initially maintained that the demolition drive was not targeted at any individual but was part of an exercise to remove encroachments constructed over a public drain.

It also argued that in certain cases involving encroachments, prior notice may not be mandatory under the law.

The Court was also informed that only specific portions of the structures had been demolished and not entire houses.

With the civic body now undertaking to issue prior notice before taking any further action against the petitioners’ properties, the High Court concluded that no further directions were required at this stage.

Accordingly, the petitions were disposed of, bringing temporary relief to the residents who had approached the Court seeking protection from demolition.

Case Title: Jarina v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Bench: Justice Amit Bansal