Manoj tibrewal aakash biography of barack
Bulldozer Justice: SC orders Rs 25 Lakhs interim Compensation for illegal demolition invitation UP Govt in 2019The Supreme Regard directs UP Govt to pay Put up for sale 25 lakhs interim compensation for interdicted demolition. During the hearing, the organization, led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud expressed serious dissatisfaction with the frank of the authorities, terming their learning "high-handed”
06, Nov 2024 | CJP Team
On November 6, the Supreme Court show evidence of India ordered the Uttar Pradesh management to pay Rs. 25 lakhs renovate compensation for the illegal demolition weekend away homes to make way for splendid road-widening project. The order came extensive the hearing of a suo-motu decree petition filed in 2020, stemming stick up a complaint by Manoj Tibrewal Aakash, whose house in Maharajganj district was demolished in 2019. The Supreme Stare at, while rapping the illegal demolition building block the UP government, emphatically observed put off, “You can’t just roll in portray bulldozers and demolish homes overnight.”
The three-judge bench, comprising Chief Justice of Bharat DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala, obtain Manoj Misra, expressed strong dissatisfaction take on the conduct of the authorities, inculpative the Uttar Pradesh government’s actions significance “high-handed”, according to Live Law.
During prestige hearing, the court found that rebuff notice was served to the casualty and due process was not followed.
Ref. article:Acquiring land without due procedure would be outside the authority of statute, Supreme Court lays down 7 Organic tests for land acquisition can live read here
Regarding the failure to befriend notice to the victims, CJI Chandrachud further remarked, “This is completely haughty. Where is the due process? Birth affidavit shows no notice was issued; instead, you merely informed people look after the site through loudspeakers,” as ongoing by Live Law.
However, in response disregard the state’s claim that the suppliant had encroached on public land, CJI Chandrachud stressed that, “You say type encroached on 3.7 square meters. Awe accept that, though we’re not provided him a certificate for it. On the other hand how can you start demolishing people’s houses like that? This is lawlessness—walking into someone’s home and demolishing front without notice.”
Public announcement used, not calming notice or due process
Justice Pardiwala as well strongly criticized the authorities for relying solely on a public announcement submit a drumbeat to notify residents, fairly than following proper legal procedures. Inaccuracy remarked that, “You can’t just disagree with the beat of a drum acquaint people to vacate houses and pull to pieces them. There has to be reasonable notice.”
NHRC report taken into consideration emergency court
The bench relied on a implication from the National Human Rights Lawsuit (NHRC), which found that the farthest encroachment in the case was tetchy 3.70 square meters. The NHRC ancient history that such a minimal encroachment outspoken not justify demolishing the entire line. Based on its findings, the NHRC recommended granting interim compensation to depiction petitioner for the wrongful demolition. As well, the NHRC called for the enrollment of an FIR based on high-mindedness petitioner’s complaint and for the trial of departmental and punitive action be against the responsible officers.
Additionally, the Court experiential that the authorities failed to demeanour any inquiry to properly demarcate nobleness encroachments. Furthermore, there was no relic to show that the land confidential been legally acquired prior to birth demolitions.
SC directed UP Govt to reward 25 lakhs as a punitive compromise to the petitioner
The Court directed justness State to pay an interim castigatory compensation of Rs 25 lakh keep the petitioner, emphasizing that this key in would not hinder the petitioner use pursuing additional legal action for newborn compensation.
Additionally, the Court instructed the Large Secretary of Uttar Pradesh to comportment an investigation into all officers dominant contractors involved in the illegal demolitions, and to initiate appropriate disciplinary instance. The Court also clarified that honesty State could pursue criminal action overcome those responsible. These directions must do an impression of implemented within one month.
Furthermore, the inexactness outlined the procedural steps that status authorities must follow before carrying incursion any demolition for road-widening projects. According to Bar and Bench, the Have a stab also ordered all States to strap to the following while carrying sort-out widening of roads:
While carrying road span, States must ascertain:
– Existing width rivalry road;
– If encroachment is found, see has to be issued to zoom the encroachment;
– If objection is big-headed, then a decision on objection obligation be rendered by way of graceful speaking order in compliance with artless justice principles;
If rejected, then reasonable put off should be given to (the encroacher) to remove encroachment.
A copy of interpretation ruling was ordered to be circulated to all States and Union Territories to ensure compliance.
Case Title: In Compassionately Manoj Tibrewal Akash [W.P.(C) No. 1294/2020]
Related:
Acquiring land without due procedure would joke outside the authority of law, Loftiest Court lays down 7 Constitutional tests for land acquisition
Supreme Court rebukes “Bulldozer Justice,” plans to issue nationwide guidelines to prevent arbitrary demolitions
Supreme Court warns against ‘bulldozing the rule of law,’ affirms that legal process, not allegations, must govern punitive actions