Supreme Court To Hear Plea Against Demolition Drive In Tughlakabad Area Tomorrow
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the demolition drive to remove encroachment from Tughlakabad area in South Delhi. The Bench comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice MM Sundresh sought the response of the Central Government, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). The Bench has listed the matter for further consideration tomorrow. "Let...
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the demolition drive to remove encroachment from Tughlakabad area in South Delhi.
The Bench comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice MM Sundresh sought the response of the Central Government, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). The Bench has listed the matter for further consideration tomorrow.
"Let them say if they have land. If you are ready to go to Narela side, we can tell them," the Court added.
Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves submitted that the petitioners wanted the best possible place, and prayed that status quo be maintained.
Refusing to stay the demolition drive, the Apex Court however, agreed to consider the matter as the first item tomorrow.
When the matter was first mentioned in the morning before CJI D.Y. Chandrachud, it was informed by Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves that pursuant to the impugned order being passed a few days ago, around a thousand houses was already gone in the demolition drive, with another thousand soon to follow suit. Averring the issue to be a 'human problem', the Senior Counsel prayed for the status quo to be restored. CJI Chandrachud granted liberty to the petitioners to mention the case before Justice Khanna's Bench.
When the matter was subsequently taken up by the Bench of Justice Khanna and Justice Sundresh, the Court observed that the land in question was government land that had been unauthorisedly occupied. It noted that 60% of the land with DDA had been encroached.
The Court further observed that under the Land Acquisition Act of 2013, it would be difficult to acquire so much land, considering the amount of compensation required.
"It might be impossible to give to so much land, amount of compensation under the 2013 Act...very difficult to acquire so much," the Bench quipped.
On the other hand, Advocate Shadan Faradat appearing on behalf of respondents, informed the Court that the process of relocation had already started, and sought more time.