Context
Why You Are Not Wrong In Wondering If Supreme Court Should Have Heard The Jahangirpuri Demolition Case At All
The Supreme Court (Sonu Mehta/Hindustan Times via Getty Images)
Why did the Supreme Court entertain the Jahangirpuri demolitions matter? Wasn’t it a matter to be resolved at lower levels?
The legal basis. The Delhi Municipal Corporation Act allows appeals against any order or notice to be made before the Appellate Tribunal. (Sec 347)
Through the commission of an appellate tribunal under the Act, the jurisdiction of civil courts has been explicitly barred.
Therefore, the correct route for the petitioners would have been to approach the appellate tribunal first and then the administrator.
Only subsequent to above appeals can petitions reach the Delhi High Court or the Supreme Court.
Even the SC said so. In a similar case concerning non-service of notice, the Supreme Court laid down that those who make unauthorised construction often run to courts stating that they were not served notice before demolition by the corporation.
It also said such an attempt should not be allowed because specific provisions bar the jurisdiction of the civil court, especially when issues such as non-service of show cause notice and demolition order can be duly examined by the Appellate Tribunal.
A bad precedent is set In the Jahangirpuri demolition case, by entertaining the petition filed by Jamiat-Ulama-i-Hind, a Delhi-based organisation of Islamic scholars, the Hon’ble Court appears to have not only overlooked a well settled precedent, but also set a wrong one, thereby risking opening the proverbial floodgates.
The current stay order may enable encroachers to file petitions arguing violation of fundamental rights due to non-service of notice and subsequently obtain stay orders.
While the courts have previously entertained petitions filed for violation of fundamental rights under Articles 32 and 226 respectively, the recourse has only been accepted under exceptional circumstances.
One last question. Moreover, assuming for a moment that there was misuse of power by the municipal corporation, what stopped the petitioners from approaching the Delhi High Court, which could very well hear petitions for violations of fundamental rights?
