NEW DELHI: In an important clarification to its two-year-old judgement against ‘bulldozer justice’, Supreme Court said its ruling does not bar use of bulldozers to remove rampant illegal constructions and encroachments on public land following compliance with the procedure laid down in municipal laws.Refusing to adjudicate individual contempt petitions alleging demolition of houses, mosques and other structures in flagrant violation of the elaborate procedure laid down in SC’s Nov 13, 2024, judgement, a bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said in each case there has to be a fact-finding exercise to ascertain whether authorities took steps arbitrarily and that jurisdictional HCs would be in better position to carry out this exercise.When the petitioners alleged bulldozers were used to remove houses, kiosks or shanties, the bench said, “There are rampant illegal constructions and encroachments in public places. That is not the area where SC has commented on use of bulldozers. SC was concerned about the pick-and-choose policy of authorities for demolitions, like using bulldozers only on houses of accused persons when illegal constructions were all around those properties.” Bulldozers need to be used when rule of law is thwarted: SC Justice Bagchi said, “Bulldozers need to be used when the rule of law is thwarted by a comfortable corruption between municipal authorities and illegal encroachers. But we also need to ensure that under the guise of implementing law, there should not be a categorisation of individuals. It runs against basic tenets of rule of law.”Let us say everyone in the area has violated the law and encroached onto a footpath. But authorities cannot single out encroachment of a family if one of its members is an accused in a criminal case to create a demonstration of reprisal. That is when the rule of law comes under scrutiny.” The foundation of the 2024 SC judgement is not a blanket ban on removal of all illegal and unauthorised constructions on public land. Bulldozers can be used to remove unauthorised structures from public land, but after scrupulously following the process specified in municipal laws, the bench said. In the judgement, SC had laid down an elaborate process of issuing notice detailing illegalities in a structure, 15 days’ time for owner to respond to the notice, grant of personal hearing, passing of final order, and then another 15 days from final order to appeal against it before appellate forum or courts.However, SC in its judgement had also clarified that “these directions will not be applicable in cases of unauthorised constructions in any public place such as road, street, footpath, abutting railway line or any river body or water bodies and also to cases where there is an order for demolition made by a court of law.” SC said it would transfer all petitions alleging violations of SC judgement in removal of illegal structure to jurisdictional HCs after additional solicitor generals Aishwrya Bhati and Anil Kumar Kaushik said that each case involves different sets of disputed facts and, hence, the need for the fact-finding exercise. It said HCs would take the help of district judicial officers to ascertain facts on the ground before proceedings to decide the petitions.Get the latest India news and live updates. Download the TOI App.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosIndia’s First Private Orbital Rocket, Skyroot’s Vikram-1, Set For July 18 LaunchGhaziabad Horror: Son Allegedly Shoots Father Dead During ₹150 Cr Property Dispute’Do Not Be Arrogant’: Kejriwal Urges PM Modi To Appoint Sonam Wangchuk As Education MinisterCan NDA Pass Delimitation And One Nation, One Election Bills? What Do The Numbers Say?Maruti To Replace Customer’s Car, Pay ₹1 Lakh Compensation In India’s First E20 Consumer Court OrderTMC’s Koel Mallick Resigns From Rajya Sabha In Fresh Blow To Mamata BanerjeeNPCIL Clarifies Kudankulam Plant Data Breach Reports, Says ‘Core Nuclear Systems Untouched’US Federal Reserve Taps Indian-Origin Experts For New Monetary Policy ReformsWhy Karnataka’s Ambitious AI City Project In Bidadi Has Triggered A Farmer Versus Development Debate’I’ll Fight, Survive, Return…’: TMC Chief Mamata Banerjee Vows Comeback Ahead Of July 21 Rally123Photostories5 lesser-known national parks in the U.S that are surprisingly empty and quiet7 Edible plants that offer multiple harvests and deserve a spot in every home garden5 powerful affirmations to quiet negative thoughts and bring more peace into your dayBirthday special: 5 throwback cult-classic outfits that made Katrina Kaif Bollywood’s ultimate fashion muse10 unique baby names inspired by rare and precious gemstonesCOVID or another respiratory virus? Doctors explain why similar symptoms are becoming more common this season, and who should be most careful5 Japanese techniques that can help you feel happier and more fulfilled every dayEveryone sees your beauty except you: 8 signs you’re more attractive than you give yourself credit for5 of the weirdest side hustles people are actually making money from5 signs you’re dealing with a people pleaser—not someone who’s genuinely kind123Hot PicksDU Round 1 Seat AllocationDiesel export priceH-1b VisaTamil Nadu school holidayIndia-UK FTAManipur JusticeRaghuram RajanAP POLYCET Phase 2 counsellingSonam WangchukTop TrendingMessiThomas Tuchels Net WorthFIFA World Cup 2026Mumbai Goa Highway AccidentBengaluru Law Student MurderBihar Railway Employee MurderSiya GoyalTaslima NasrinGujarat RapeIran war
NEW DELHI: In an important clarification to its two-year-old judgement against ‘bulldozer justice’, Supreme Court said its ruling does not bar use of bulldozers to remove rampant illegal constructions and encroachments on public land following compliance with the procedure laid down in municipal laws.Refusing to adjudicate individual contempt petitions alleging demolition of houses, mosques and other structures in flagrant violation of the elaborate procedure laid down in SC’s Nov 13, 2024, judgement, a bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said in each case there has to be a fact-finding exercise to ascertain whether authorities took steps arbitrarily and that jurisdictional HCs would be in better position to carry out this exercise.When the petitioners alleged bulldozers were used to remove houses, kiosks or shanties, the bench said, “There are rampant illegal constructions and encroachments in public places. That is not the area where SC has commented on use of bulldozers. SC was concerned about the pick-and-choose policy of authorities for demolitions, like using bulldozers only on houses of accused persons when illegal constructions were all around those properties.”
Bulldozers need to be used when rule of law is thwarted: SC
Justice Bagchi said, “Bulldozers need to be used when the rule of law is thwarted by a comfortable corruption between municipal authorities and illegal encroachers. But we also need to ensure that under the guise of implementing law, there should not be a categorisation of individuals. It runs against basic tenets of rule of law.“Let us say everyone in the area has violated the law and encroached onto a footpath. But authorities cannot single out encroachment of a family if one of its members is an accused in a criminal case to create a demonstration of reprisal. That is when the rule of law comes under scrutiny.” The foundation of the 2024 SC judgement is not a blanket ban on removal of all illegal and unauthorised constructions on public land. Bulldozers can be used to remove unauthorised structures from public land, but after scrupulously following the process specified in municipal laws, the bench said. In the judgement, SC had laid down an elaborate process of issuing notice detailing illegalities in a structure, 15 days’ time for owner to respond to the notice, grant of personal hearing, passing of final order, and then another 15 days from final order to appeal against it before appellate forum or courts.However, SC in its judgement had also clarified that “these directions will not be applicable in cases of unauthorised constructions in any public place such as road, street, footpath, abutting railway line or any river body or water bodies and also to cases where there is an order for demolition made by a court of law.” SC said it would transfer all petitions alleging violations of SC judgement in removal of illegal structure to jurisdictional HCs after additional solicitor generals Aishwrya Bhati and Anil Kumar Kaushik said that each case involves different sets of disputed facts and, hence, the need for the fact-finding exercise. It said HCs would take the help of district judicial officers to ascertain facts on the ground before proceedings to decide the petitions.
