Court questions Lucknow Development Authority's actions; demands affidavits from officials on allegations of biased enforcement.
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has stayed the demolition of a property owned by Kanchan Singh in Lucknow, citing allegations of selective enforcement by the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA). The Division Bench, comprising Justices Pankaj Bhatia and Amitabh Kumar Rai, took a critical stance on the LDA's actions, describing them as "prima facie illegal," especially since similar constructions in the vicinity have not been targeted.
The case originated when Kanchan Singh contested the demolition order issued against his property, arguing that it was carried out despite an appeal being pending. Counsel for the petitioner highlighted the apparent discrimination, pointing out that numerous other constructions in the area remained untouched. Photographic evidence was presented to support these claims, suggesting a possible mala fide intent by the authorities.
During the hearing, the court was informed by the respondent's counsel, Sri Ratnesh Chandra, that the property in question had been sealed twice, but construction activities continued, prompting the demolition order. However, the court was not convinced by this defense. Justice Bhatia emphasized that the demolition should not have proceeded while an appeal was actively being heard.
The court has ordered the Vice Chairman of the LDA and Mr. Devansh Trivedi, OSD, LDA, to submit personal affidavits within three weeks, explaining the selective action against Singh's property while ignoring other similar violations in the area. This directive underscores the court's commitment to ensuring fairness and equality in administrative actions.
Pending the next hearing, the court has prohibited any further demolition activities on Singh's property. The court also hinted at possible actions against Mr. Devansh Trivedi under Section 26-D of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, depending on the findings from the affidavits.
This ruling raises critical questions about the fairness of enforcement practices by urban development authorities and reaffirms the judiciary's role in safeguarding citizens' rights against arbitrary administrative actions.
Bottom line:-
Selective demolition of property during the pendency of an appeal before the appellate authority is prima facie illegal, especially when similar constructions in the vicinity have not been acted upon.
Statutory provision(s): Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, Section 26-D.
Kanchan Singh v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB)(Lucknow) : Law Finder Doc id # 2933179
