'No Rubber-Stamp Reasons': Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs Municipal Corporations To Stop Passing Demolition Orders On Printed Proforma

Update: 2023-06-02 08:03 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article
story

While observing that an order is not to be passed mechanically, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has directed the municipal corporations to not pass any demolition order under Sections 452 & 461 of the Municipal Corporation Act on the printed format."They shall pass orders on consideration of the reply submitted and such consideration be manifested in the order on assigning of the reasons...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

While observing that an order is not to be passed mechanically, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has directed the municipal corporations to not pass any demolition order under Sections 452 & 461 of the Municipal Corporation Act on the printed format.

"They shall pass orders on consideration of the reply submitted and such consideration be manifested in the order on assigning of the reasons for the satisfaction eitherway, recorded in the order itself," said Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari, while further directing the Chief Secretary to issue necessary orders at his end to all the concerned of the Municipal Corporations in Andhra Pradesh.

The court passed the order while setting aside the demolition order passed by Eluru Municipal Corporation in a case without considering the response to the show cause notice.

“Right to Property is recognized as a human right. It’s a right guaranteed by the Constitution of India as well under Article 300-A, not to be deprived of it save by authority of law,” said the court, adding that, “Orders of demolition/removal of the one’s property, in the manner, like the one, as in the present case, cannot be sustained as it would deprive the person of his constitutional right to property not in accordance with law”.

Justice Tilhari said that passing an order on the printed proforma does not comply with the requirements of statutory provisions nor with the principles of natural justice.

"The order is not to be passed mechanically, just signing the printed format. There should be consideration of the reply to the show cause notice and assigning the reasons," said the court.

The court observed that the administrative authority and the tribunals are also obliged to give reasons for their decisions.

“There should be no pretence of reason or rubber-stamp reasons,” it said.

Considering that many such writ petitions are filed challenging the order of confirmation of demolition passed without assigning reason, the Court said, “This practice, by the respondent authorities of passing printed format order must be stopped”.

The authorities have to discharge their statutory duty as per mandate of law, with due consideration of the facts submitted in reply to the show cause notice, and recording their satisfaction, either way, supported with reasons which should be assigned in the order itself, it added.

“There may be many genuine cases, where the constructions are in violation of the rule or the building plans or there is encroachment. But, because of the Authorities not discharging their statutory duty in a manner recognized by law, in passing the order statutorily, and in consonance with Principles of Natural Justice, such orders cannot be permitted to be implemented, with the ultimate result that, the objects of the Municipal Corporation Act are defeated,” said the court. 

Setting aside the order of demolition of the petitioner’s property, the Court directed the Eluru Municipal Corporation to pass fresh orders, in accordance with the law within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

Case Title: Ille Ratna Prasad v. state of AP &Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AP) 28

For petitioner:Advocate Chalasani Venkaiah

For respondents: Advocates G. Naresh Kumar,

M. Manohar Reddy, Standing Counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

Full View
Tags:    

Similar News