[LIVE-UPDATES] Hearing On Kangana Ranaut's Plea Against Demolition of Her Office Building

Chinoy : She has made only evasive denials, carefully, knowing fully that she has violated the laws.

Chinoy : Nowhere in the entire petition, she doesn't say she did not carry out the work, she had permission for the work etc. This is a writ under Article 226. You can't play poker.

Chinoy : When the response was "no work is being carried out", I don't have to wait(for demolition). The law says that. There is no need for elaborate hearing over 7 days.

Chinoy : The law allows demolition within 24 hours. She does not say in the reply that her work was in the nature of water-leakage proofing. She makes a categorical denial by saying no work at all. 

Chinoy refers to the reply filed on behalf of Kangana on September 8 - She says no work is being done, whereas three days ago our inspection revealed work in progress, with workers, machinery etc. She does not say in the reply that she is doing water proofing work.

Chinoy :The record establishes that the petitioner has brazenly made unlawful structural alterations. She has not said before the court when the alterations were made.

Chinoy : I did not raise the objection first as the writ petition prepared in haste may not have such averments. But even in the amended petition and the supplementary affidavit there is no mention of exceptional circumstances

Chinoy : This will be a case of tail wagging the dog. The petitioner herself creates a political controversy and cites that to be reason to entertain a writ.

Chinoy : It cannot be that a political controversy created by the petitioner(Kangana Ranaut) in the media is an exceptional circumstance (to maintain a writ).

Chinoy : The general rule is that writ petition is not maintainable in such a case.

There is not a word in the petition or in the amended petition as to why writ should be entertained and what are the exceptional circumstances as to why it should not be send to a civil court.