[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Yash Seth vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 April, 2026
Author: Milind Ramesh Phadke
Bench: Milind Ramesh Phadke
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11445
1 WP-28069-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE
ON THE 7 th OF APRIL, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 28069 of 2019
YASH SETH
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Prashant Sharma - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri K K Prajapati - Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.
Shri Purushottam Das Bidua - Advocate for the respondent [R-3].
ORDER
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed
by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-
"i. That, the respondent may kindly be restrained from creating
any hindrance in the peaceful possession of the petitioner.
ii. That, the respondent be further directed to not to erect the road
over the property of the petitioner.
Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts
and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 3/
Municipal Corporation, Gwalior, has acted in an arbitrary and unlawful manner
by demolishing the boundary wall constructed over a portion of land in the lawful
possession of the petitioner, without issuing any prior notice or affording an
opportunity of hearing. Such action has compelled the petitioner to approach this
Hon'ble Court by way of the present petition.
3. It is further submitted that this Hon'ble Court, vide order dated
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11445
2 WP-28069-2019
19.12.2019, after hearing the parties, was pleased to direct maintenance of status
quo with respect to the property in question, and the said interim order continues
to remain in force as on date. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed
reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Re: Directions in the
matter of demolition of structures, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 295 of 2022, reported
in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3291. It is contended that in paragraphs 90 and 91 of the
said judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down specific guidelines
mandating adherence to due process of law, including issuance of prior notice and
grant of reasonable opportunity before undertaking any demolition action. He
quoted the said Paras which are reproduced as under:-
"90. In order to allay the fears in the minds of the citizens with regard
to arbitrary exercise of power by the officers/officials of the State, we
find it necessary to issue certain directions in exercise of our power
under Article 142 of the Constitution. We are also of the view that even
after orders of demolition are passed, the affected party needs to be
given some time so as to challenge the order of demolition before an
appropriate forum. We are further of the view that even in cases of
persons who do not wish to contest the demolition order, sufficient
time needs to be given to them to vacate and arrange their affairs. It is
not a happy sight to see women, children and aged persons dragged to
the streets overnight. Heavens would not fall on the authorities if they
hold their hands for some period.
91. At the outset, we clarify that these directions will not be applicable
if there is an unauthorized structure in any public place such as road,
street, footpath, abutting railway line or any river body or water bodies
and also to cases where there is an order for demolition made by a
Court of law.
A. NOTICE
i. No demolition should be carried out without a prior show cause
notice returnable either in accordance with the time provided by the
local municipal laws or within 15 days' time from the date of service of
such notice, whichever is later.
ii. The notice shall be served upon the owner/occupier by a registered
post A.D. Additionally, the notice shall also be affixed conspicuously
on the outer portion of the structure in question.
iii. The time of 15 days, stated herein above, shall start from the date of
receipt of the said notice.
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11445
3 WP-28069-2019
iv. To prevent any allegation of backdating, we direct that as soon as
the show cause notice is duly served, intimation thereof shall be sent to
the office of Collector/District Magistrate of the district digitally by
email and an auto generated reply acknowledging receipt of the mail
should also be issued from the office of the Collector/District
Magistrate. The Collector/DM shall designate a nodal officer and also
assign an email address and communicate the same to all the municipal
and other authorities in charge of building regulations and demolition
within one month from today.
v. The notice shall contain the details regarding:
a. the nature of the unauthorized construction.
b. the details of the specific violation and the grounds of demolition.
c. a list of documents that the noticee is required to furnish along with
his reply.
d. The notice should also specify the date on which the personal
hearing is fixed and the designated authority before whom the hearing
will take place:
vi. Every municipal/local authority shall assign a designated digital
portal, within 3 months from today wherein details regarding
service/pasting of the notice, the reply, the show cause notice and the
order passed thereon would be available.
B. PERSONAL HEARING
i. The designated authority shall give an opportunity of personal
hearing to the person concerned.
ii. The minutes of such a hearing shall also be recorded.
C. FINAL ORDER
i. Upon hearing, the designated authority shall pass a final order.
ii. The final order shall contain:
a. the contentions of the noticee, and if the designated authority
disagrees with the same, the reasons thereof:
b. as to whether the unauthorized construction is compoundable, if it
is not so, the reasons therefor:
c. if the designated authority finds that only part of the construction is
unauthorized/noncompoundable, then the details thereof.
d. as to why the extreme step of demolition is the only option available
and other options like compounding and demolishing only part of the
property are not available.
D. AN OPPORTUNITY OF APPELLATE AND JUDICIAL
SCRUTINY OF THE FINAL ORDER.
i. We further direct that if the statute provides for an appellate
opportunity and time for filing the same, or even if it does not so, the
order will not be implemented for a period of 15 days from the date of
receipt thereof. The order shall also be displayed on the digital portal as
stated above.
ii. An opportunity should be given to the owner/occupier to remove the
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11445
4 WP-28069-2019
unauthorized construction or demolish the same within a period of 15
days. Only after the period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the
notice has expired and the owner/occupier has not removed/demolished
the unauthorized construction, and if the same is not stayed by any
appellate authority or a court, the concerned authority shall take steps
to demolish the same. It is only such construction which is found to be
unauthorized and not compoundable shall be demolished.
iii. Before demolition, a detailed inspection report shall be prepared by
the concerned authority signed by two Panchas.
E. PROCEEDINGS OF DEMOLITION
1. The proceedings of demolition shall be video-graphed, and the
concerned authority shall prepare a demolition report giving the list of
police officials and civil personnel that participated in the demolition
process. Video recording to be duly preserved.
ii. The said demolition report should be forwarded to the Municipal
Commissioner by email and shall also be displayed on the digital
portal.
4. It is further submitted that admittedly, the action of respondent No. 3 is
wholly illegal and in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore,
the respondent ought not to be permitted to demolish the structure situated on the
land in question for the purpose of road construction without strictly adhering to
the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment.
Accordingly, it is prayed that the present petition may be disposed of with a
direction to respondent No. 3 that in future if it desires to undertake the
construction of a road, it shall comply with the directions contained in Paragraph
91 of the aforesaid judgment.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No. 3, Shri
Purushottam Das Bidua, submits that in view of the interim order of status quo
passed by this Hon'ble Court, the proposed road construction undertaken by the
Corporation has not been carried out as of date. It is further submitted that, in the
event any such construction is undertaken in the future, the Corporation shall
strictly adhere to the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Directions in the Matter of Demolition of Structures (supra) .
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:11445
5 WP-28069-2019
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, this
Court finds that, following the initial demolition of the boundary wall, no further
demolition of the structure on the land in question has taken place in light of the
interim order passed by this Court. This indicates that the intended construction of
the road over the said land has not been executed by the Corporation.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and the guidelines laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Directions in the Matter of Demolition of Structures
(supra), particularly Paragraphs 90 and 91, this Court deems it appropriate to
dispose of the present petition with a direction to the Municipal Corporation,
Gwalior (respondent No. 3) that, in the event it undertakes any construction
activity of road and for that proposes to demolish the structure standing over the
land in question in the future, it shall strictly adhere to the aforesaid guidelines,
and only thereafter proceed with any demolition.
8. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition stands disposed of.
(MILIND RAMESH PHADKE)
JUDGE
ojha
