9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 1527X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... v. Mr. Parmanand Gaur, AOR Ms. Megha Gaur, JUDGMENT ABHAY S. OKA, J Leave granted. Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned Attorney General for India appearing for the first respondent, State of Uttar Pradesh. We have also heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the second respondent, Prayagraj Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "the PDA"). These cases shock our conscience. The residential premises/buildings of the appellants have been highhandedly and illegally demolished in the manner set out in this judgment. The demolition action is purportedly taken under Section 27 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the"1973 Act") by the PDA. Section 27 of the 1973 Act reads thus: "27. Order of demolition of building.- (1) Where any development has been commenced or is being carried on or has been completed in contravention of the Master Plan or without the permission approval or sanction referred to in Section 14 or in contravention of any conditions subject to which such permission, approval or sanction has been granted, in relation to the development area, then, wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the 1973 Act, was issued on 18th December 2020 by the PDA. On the very day, the notice was allegedly affixed on the structure with the remark that it was attempted to be served on the appellants on the same day, but it could not be served. Thereafter, an order dated 8th January, 2021, was passed by the Zonal Officer of the PDA directing demolition of the structures of the appellants. We find from the counter affidavit that an identical endorsement was made on the said order of 8th January, 2021 and that a copy of the order was allegedly affixed. Thereafter, on 1st March, 2021, another communication of the order of demolition passed earlier was issued by the Zonal Officer of the PDA to the appellants. Even though the said communication was purportedly affixed on the same day, it was also sent by Registered Post, which was served upon the appellants on 6th March, 2021 and on 7th March, 2021, the demolition of residential structures of the appellants was carried out by use of bulldozers. As far as service of notice is concerned, the law has been subsequently laid down by this Court in the case of In Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of structures 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3291. Pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , orders and other documents required by this Act or any rule or regulation made and there under to be served upon any person shall save as otherwise provided in this Act or such rule or regulation be deemed to be duly served - (a) Where the person to be served is a company if the document is addressed to the secretary of the company at its registered Office or at its principal office or place of business and is either- (i) sent by registered post, or (ii) delivered at the registered office or at the principal office or place of business of the company, (b) where the person to be served is a firm, if the document is, addressed to the firm at its principal place of business, identifying it by the name or style under which its business is carried on and is either- (i) sent by registered post, or (ii) delivered at the said place of business; (c) where the person to be served is a public body or a corporation or society or other body, if the document is addressed to the as secretary, treasurer or other chief officer of that body, corporation or society at its principal office, and is either- (i) sent by registered post. Or (ii) delivered at that office., (d) in any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the person on more than one day, one can say that "the person cannot be found". It cannot be that the person entrusted with the job of serving notice goes to the address and affixes it after finding that on that day, the person concerned is unavailable at a given time. The words "if such a person cannot be found" cannot be given any other interpretation. As stated earlier, it is evident that repeated efforts have to be made to effect personal service. Only if those efforts fail, can the other two options be resorted to. One is of affixing and the second is of sending by registered post. Considering the drastic consequences provided in Section 27, recourse should usually be taken to both modes. The officers of the PDA must understand that before a structure is demolished, every possible effort should be made to effect a proper service of the show-cause notice. It is their duty to do so. Moreover, after proper and effective service of the order of demolition, at least 15 days' time must be provided to the owner or occupier to avail the remedy of an Appeal under Section 27(2) of the 1973 Act. The notice issued on 18th December, 2020, was a show cause calling upon the addressee to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o shelter guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The action is completely arbitrary. Moreover, carrying out demolition of residential structures in such a highhanded manner shows insensitivity on the part of the statutory development authority. This is one more case of bulldozer justice. The officers of the PDA have forgotten that the rule of law prevails in our country. Unfortunately, the State Government has supported the PDA. On the earlier occasion, we suggested to the learned counsel for the appellants that we may permit them to reconstruct the structures, subject to giving an undertaking that in the event the appeal filed under sub Section (2) of Section 27 is dismissed, the same will have to be demolished at their own cost. Today, the learned senior counsel and the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, on instructions, stated that the appellants are not in a position to reconstruct the structures. In view of this statement, there is now there is no occasion to direct the planning authority to follow the due process of law in these cases. However, considering the inhuman and illegal action of demolition carried out, the planning authority must be sad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
