Razing bulldozer justice: Apex court underlines the need for due process

Apex court underlines the need for due process

The Supreme Court has underlined its aversion to “bulldozer justice” by describing the Prayagraj Development Authority’s move to bulldoze the homes of six private citizens in 2021 “inhumane and illegal” and ordering the institution to pay each house owner ₹10 lakh as compensation. Although the incident linked to this April 1 judgment by a two-judge Bench predates the apex court’s November 2024 order (by a separate Bench) issuing binding directives for states to follow in bulldozing properties, it builds on it by strengthening the edifice of the law in this regard.

 

Choosing not to comment on the issue of land encroachment that allegedly prompted the demolitions, the Bench, comprising judges Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, was unequivocal in describing the move by the Prayagraj authority as illegal and invoked the petitioners’ fundamental right to shelter as a basic feature of the Constitution. The right to shelter is recognised as a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, ensuring that every citizen has access to adequate housing — a concept that extends beyond just physical infrastructure to security and privacy as well. Forced eviction without proper rehabilitation and due process violates the right to shelter. In the Prayagraj case, the judges focused on the lack of due process, which “shocked the conscience” of the court. The procedure laid down under Section 27 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, which governs the demolition of illegal structures, requires that authorities cannot issue a demolition order without serving notice on the parties concerned and allowing them a reasonable opportunity to show cause. In the current case, the authority issued a showcause notice in mid-December 2020, and the notice was pasted on the property. It stated two attempts had been made to serve the notice in person. A demolition order was pasted on the properties in early January 2021. Later, it transpired that the first registered-post communication was sent on March 1, 2021, and was received on March 6, 2021. The demolitions were carried out the next day, leaving the appellants with no opportunity to appeal under the law. In other words, the Prayagraj authority had flouted the state’s own laws.

 

Given the fact that the practice of “bulldozer justice” has spread rapidly from its origins in Uttar Pradesh to Delhi, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Assam, and Maharashtra, the Supreme Court’s admonition to the Prayagraj Development Authority and the imposition of penalties will add heft to the timely November 2024 ruling. Choosing to invoke its extraordinary and discretionary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court sought to fix accountability on public servants by laying down a detailed process before deploying the bulldozer. This includes, among other things, 15 days’ notice on demolition to the occupants, detailing the nature of the violation, a fair opportunity for the owner to challenge the state action, a “reasoned conclusion” of the final order, and a videograph of the demolition. More importantly, the apex court fixed personal liability on public servants who violated these rules, including contempt of court and prosecution. The April judgment and November ruling could well moderate the punitive enthusiasms of state administration. But the real test lies with the lower courts, the first court of appeal for victims, to ensure that the average citizens’ legitimate right to shelter is not bulldozed by politics.