Read Time: 06 minutes
In its response to the rejoinder filed by Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind, the UP Government has submitted that Jamiat cannot be permitted to raise such grievances as it is not one of the aggrieved by the demolitions.
The State of Uttar Pradesh has submitted before the Supreme Court that Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind has initiated a proxy litigation in an attempt to obtain sweeping interim orders without the examination of the legality of the demolition actions taken by the Municipal/ Development Authorities of the state.
UP government has further submitted that in case there are any individual grievances against action taken under the law of the land, the aggrieved person may approach a competent court.
Originally, in the main plea filed by Jamiat Ulema-I-Hind after the Jahangirpuri demolitions, Jamiat had urged the top court to issue appropriate directions to the Center and States against actions of bulldozing properties of any accused in any criminal proceedings.
Later, two applications were filed by Jamiat in the pending main plea against the demolition of properties in Prayagraj and Kanpur.
After hearing those two applications, a bench of Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Vikram Nath had refused to intervene in the Uttar Pradesh demolitions and had directed the authorities to follow due process of law.
In their response affidavit to the rejoinder filed by Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind in the case pertaining to the demolitions in UP, the state government has submitted that the applications before the Supreme Court are nothing but proxy litigation to protect illegal encroachments, and that too, not by the actual affected parties.
Filed through Rakesh Kumar Malpani, Special Secretary, Home Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, the affidavit states that any illegal encroachments on public land and/or illegal/unauthorised constructions, will be governed by the law of the land, which in the State of U.P. would be the Uttar Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act 1959 and Rules framed thereunder, and the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 and Rules.
It has been further submitted that Jamiat is trying to sensationalize the issue as the present applications are only concerned with the demolitions that took place after the incidents of June 2022 when riots broke out across the country following the comments made by the then BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma on Prophet Mohammad.
Submitting that the entire issue is subjudice before the Allahabad High Court, the State of Uttar Pradesh has argued that Jamiat, not being an affected party in the said demolition, may not be permitted to address the merits thereof, especially when the High Court is already seized of the same by the affected party.
Court has been further informed that two persons from Kanpur whose properties were demolished, had accepted that their properties were infact illegal encroachments.
Uttar Pradesh Government in its previous response to the application filed by Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind had stated that the Kanpur and Prayagraj Development Authority' actions were strictly in compliance with the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973.
The Previous Affidavit filed by the Uttar Pradesh Government also submitted that Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind had cherry-picked a few incidents and had attempted to give a mala fide color to the lawful action.
Case Title: Jamiat Ulama I Hind and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Please Login or Register
