Local residents gather in front of bulldozer in Shaheen Bagh.The Supreme Court Monday refused to entertain a petition filed by CPI(M) challenging the anti-encroachment drive in Shaheen Bagh and asked those aggrieved by action of the municipal authorities to approach the High Court. “What is this CPI(M) party filing this case? We can understand somebody who is affected coming before us… What is the violation of fundamental right (of the party)? Under Article 32, who can come?” said a bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and B R Gavai, dismissing the plea as withdrawn.
Making clear the displeasure over the court being flooded with demolition matters from across the country, Justice Rao said: “We are not seized of all encroachments in this country. And on that day itself (when a petition was filed raising the issue of demolition drives in other states), we made it clear to Mr Kapil Sibal when he was mentioning about the other parts of the country. We said we are not expressing any view… We have to balance interests… We will definitely interfere, but not encroachments being removed in accordance with law.”
The bench added: “We have never given any licence to everybody to come here and then say my house is being demolished even if it is unauthorised. And the Supreme Court would be doing only that… This is too much. Merely because we are showing indulgence, don’t take shelter under the court’s orders.”
Justice Rao added: “We are making it very clear. If there is any violation of law, definitely we will step in, but not anticipation at the behest of political parties like this.”
Best of Express Premium
Appearing for the CPI(M), senior advocate P V Surendranath said the plea was in public interest, but the bench wondered why no aggrieved person had approached the court. “You are better advised to go to the High Court… Not at the behest of political parties, please don’t turn this into a platform. If there is somebody aggrieved, they should come,” said Justice Rao.
The counsel then said there is a plea by a hawker’s union representing those affected, and that they had moved the court because structures were being demolished. But the bench said: “If hawkers are encroaching the pavement… they might be removed following the law. Go to the High Court. Why are you coming here?”
The court pointed out that it had intervened in the case of Jahangirpuri only because of demolition of structures. “When we were informed there were some structures being demolished… we gave an order. If we start interfering in these matters, we will be doing only that,” said Justice Rao.
The senior counsel said many residents are also affected. To this, the court said, “Let those people come. We do not know what is being demolished.”
Turning to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for South MCD, Justice Rao remarked, “Mr Solicitor, though we are not interfering, but as and when you take up this activity, why don’t you do this in accordance with law. Give them a notice.”
Mehta insisted the process is followed and added that the petitioner is misrepresenting facts to create political hype. “Petitioners are misrepresenting that houses are being demolished. There is a letter and officers are present to tell Your Lordships that this is a routine drive going on since long and those who have occupied the pavement and public road are being removed… See what kind of misrepresentations are going on to create a political hype,” he said.
- The Indian Express website has been rated GREEN for its credibility and trustworthiness by Newsguard, a global service that rates news sources for their journalistic standards.
