![Demolition drives in U.P. may challenge basic tenets of law](https://www.thehindu.com/incoming/5q9ndz/article65529777.ece/alternates/LANDSCAPE_615/PTI06_11_2022_000030B.jpg)
Demolition drives in U.P. may challenge basic tenets of law
The Hindu
‘The right to property under Article 300A is a human right’
Recent demolition drives in the aftermath of the Prophet remarks row may challenge certain basic tenets of law, including the right of a person to be heard first, and that the state can deprive a person of his or her property only after following due procedure and under the authority of a valid law as mandated under Article 300A of the Constitution.
“The right to property under Article 300A is a human right,” former Supreme Court judge Justice V. Gopala Gowda told The Hindu on Wednesday.
Justice Gowda is one of the 12 signatories of a letter urging the Supreme Court to take suo motu cognisance of the demolitions in Uttar Pradesh. The letter conveyed that razing down buildings without giving affected persons prior notice or hearing them first was a violation of the rule of law. Rule of law is a basic feature of the Constitution.
The letter quoted media reports of the Chief Minister “exhorting officials to take such action against those guilty that it sets an example so that no one commits a crime or takes law into their hands in future”. It contended that the “coordinated manner in which the police and development authorities have acted lead to the clear conclusion that demolitions are a form of collective extra judicial punishment, attributable to a state policy which is illegal”.
A plea by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind in the Supreme Court contended that the “demolition of properties carried out by the Uttar Pradesh government in retaliation was in breach of the laws enacted by the state legislature itself”. It referred to Section 10 of the Uttar Pradesh (Regulation of Building Operations) Act of 1958 which mandates that a building should not be demolished without giving the affected parties “a reasonable opportunity of being heard”. Section 27 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 requires the affected person to be heard and given 15 days’ prior notice before proceeding with the demolition. Besides this, the Act allows a person aggrieved with the order of demolition to appeal within 30 days.
Former Madras High Court judge, Justice K. Chandru, said Article 300A is a “potent” right. He said demolitions were a product of the “politicisation of the bureaucracy”. Justice Chandru said acts like demolition were a “nuclear button” held against “problem creators”.
“It is like cause and effect. If these people have violated building laws, give them a chance to be heard, give them notice… Immediate demolitions without court orders hark back to the Emergency days,” Justice Chandru said.