SC stresses ‘rule of law‘ in bulldozer demolitions, mandates 15-day notice

In a significant ruling on Wednesday, the Supreme Court mandated that no demolition of property may proceed without issuing a prior 15-day notice to the property owner, strictly adhering to statutory guidelines. The ruling aims to reinforce legal processes and curb arbitrary actions by authorities.

A bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and K.V. Vishwanathan specified that the notice must be served by registered post and visibly fixed on the outer wall of the structure in question. The notice should detail the nature of the alleged violation, specifics of the unauthorised construction, and the legal basis for the demolition.

Moreover, any demolition must be videographed, with failure to comply potentially leading to contempt of court.

"Respect for the rule of law and the safeguarding of citizens’ rights against arbitrary state action are fundamental," observed the bench. "Unlawful demolitions foster lawlessness, undermining constitutional democracy.”

The court underscored that the judiciary’s role in overseeing due process cannot be usurped by the executive. "If the state acts as a judge by ordering demolition without legal procedure, it infringes upon the rule of law," it stated.

Additionally, all demolition-related notices must be accessible on a designated portal maintained by the municipal authority, and district magistrates are held accountable for ensuring compliance.

The ruling stems from multiple petitions challenging the increasing use of bulldozers by authorities as punitive measures against individuals, particularly impacting minorities and marginalised groups.

The petitions argued that such extrajudicial demolitions set a dangerous precedent, turning illegal punishment into a routine practice. On 1 October, after extensive hearings, the Supreme Court extended its interim order preventing demolitions without permission, pending further instructions.

Reaffirming India’s secular framework, the court clarified that the ruling would apply uniformly across religious backgrounds. It noted that while public safety remains a priority, structures obstructing public use—whether temples, dargahs, or gurdwaras—would not be exempt from removal.

The court also raised concerns about selective enforcement, particularly where municipal actions appeared biased. "The issue here is not about faith but about adherence to municipal laws," the court remarked, suggesting a nationwide online portal for transparency and public awareness on demolitions.