Upholding a Calcutta HC order directing demolition of an unauthorised construction, the Supreme Court has directed that “courts must adopt a strict approach while dealing with cases of illegal construction and should not readily engage themselves in judicial regularisation of buildings erected without requisite permissions of the competent authority”.
In its April 30 order, a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan rejected the request for “one chance to pray for regularisation of the unauthorised construction.” The top court said, “… Unauthorised construction has to be demolished… Judicial discretion would be guided by expediency. Courts are not free from statutory fetters. Justice is to be rendered in accordance with law.”
It added, “we are at pains to observe that the aforesaid aspect has not been kept in mind by many State Governments while enacting Regularisation of Unauthorized Development Act based on payment of impact fees.”
The bench referred to its verdict last year in Rajendra Kumar Barjatya and another vs UP Avas Evam Vikas Parishad and others, and said in its order Wednesday, “We have made ourselves very explicitly clear that each and every construction must be made scrupulously following and strictly adhering to the rules and regulations. In the event of any violation, being brought to the notice of the courts, the same should be dealt with iron hands and any leniency or mercy shown to the person guilty of unauthorised construction would amount to showing misplaced sympathy.”
On the need for a “firm stance” against unauthorised construction, the order said it “emanates not only from inviolable duty cast upon the courts to uphold the rule of law, rather such judicial restraint gains more force in order to facilitate the well-being of all concerned. The law ought not to come to rescue of those who flout its rigours as allowing the same might result in flourishing the culture of impunity…”
While hearing a PIL, the HC had ordered that “not only the construction, which has been put up by the private respondents is to be dealt with, but the KMC ( Municipal Corporation) authority should also cause inspection of all the neighbouring properties and if any violation is found, the above directions will apply mutatis mutandis to such constructions as well.”
The HC added that the action, if any, should be taken after issuing notices to owners/occupants of those properties.
The SC bench said it is “in complete agreement with” the HC order and that “we admire the courage and conviction with which the High Court has proceeded to take care of unauthorised construction.”
