Today, On 27th January, the Supreme Court announced it would hear pleas, including a contempt petition, against Gujarat authorities for allegedly demolishing residential and religious buildings in Gir Somnath district without its prior approval. The case will be taken up in three weeks. The petition claims that the demolitions were carried out in violation of the court’s order. This hearing will address the legality of these actions and their impact on affected people.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court announced on Monday, that it would hear pleas, including a contempt petition against Gujarat authorities for allegedly demolishing residential and religious structures in Gir Somnath district without its prior approval, in three weeks.
When the case presented before Justices B R Gavai and S V N Bhatti, the bench scheduled the hearing for a non-miscellaneous day in three weeks.
One of the lawyers involved indicated that they had filed an application seeking permission to conduct the Urs festival from February 1 to February 3. The lawyer noted that the festival has been celebrated there for centuries and mentioned that they had requested police permission on January 13, but had not received a response.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Gujarat authorities, stated,
“I don’t know who she (the lawyer) represents.”
He added,
“Now, your lordships’ direction is that the government will continue with the land. We are continuing with the land. It is adjacent to the Somnath temple. There are several issues. It can’t be decided in an IA (interlocutory application) by a non-party in an appeal against an interim order.”
The counsel responded, asserting that she was not a non-party and informed the bench that a Dargah had been demolished in the area.
Mehta countered, saying,
“Now, there is no dargah. This is against an interim order. Now, pleadings before the high court are fully complete. The pleadings run into some 1,700 pages. Let the high court decide it finally.”
The bench asked Mehta to review the application and indicated it would be heard on January 31.
During a previous hearing on December 2, the Supreme Court granted four weeks for the petitioners to file their response after the Gujarat government submitted an affidavit regarding the demolition drive in Gir Somnath district.
Reports indicated that a demolition drive commenced on September 28 last year to clear encroachments on public land near the Somnath temple.
On December 2, Mehta noted that one of the pleas in the Supreme Court was against an interim order from the Gujarat High Court concerning the demolition. The Gujarat government, in its affidavit, justified its actions as part of an ongoing effort to remove encroachments on public land.
In a prior ruling on September 17, the Supreme Court stopped demolitions, including those of properties belonging to individuals accused of crimes, without its permission. The court stressed that even one instance of illegal demolition contradicted the “ethos” of the Constitution.
However, it clarified that its order did not extend to unauthorized structures on public roads, footpaths, railway lines, or public places like water bodies.
In an affidavit from the Gir Somnath District collector, the state government stated that the Supreme Court’s September 17 ruling made it clear that the stay on demolitions did not apply to encroachments on “public places” and government lands, which included water bodies.
On November 13, 2024, the Supreme Court established pan-India guidelines stating that no property should be demolished without a prior showcause notice, allowing affected parties 15 days to respond.
When the Gujarat demolition issue was last discussed on October 25, the state government confirmed that the land involved in the alleged illegal demolitions of religious structures would remain with it and not be allocated to any third party.
The bench was considering a plea against a Gujarat High Court order that declined to impose a status quo on the demolitions of Muslim religious structures. On October 4, the top court had warned authorities that it would compel them to restore demolished structures if they found them to be acting in contempt of its order against such actions.
However, the bench did not order a status quo on the demolitions near the Somnath temple in Gujarat.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
