The Supreme Court on Monday declined to interfere in the demolition notices issued to property owners in Batla House, Jamia Nagar, and directed the petitioners to approach the appropriate authorities.
No interim relief from SC
A vacation bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma refused to give any interim stay on the demolition notices and posted the matter for hearing in July.
The residents approached the Apex Court seeking a stay on the eviction and demolition.
The petition was filed by Sultana Shaheen and 39 others who own properties in Batla House, saying that a 15-day eviction/demolition notice was pasted on their properties on May 27.
Demolitions follow SC’s May 7 order
“This was done after the Supreme Court’s order of May 7, directing the Delhi government and the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to demolish illegal properties in the Batla House area,” said the petition filed through advocate Adeel Ahmed.
The petition said that the action was wrong because they were never made a party to that case and were denied the opportunity to present their case.
Residents served demolition notices
“They are genuine residents and property owners of Khasra Nos. 271 and 279, Batla House, who have now received 15-day eviction/demolition notices on May 27, 2025, according to the Court’s order on May 7, 2025, without being made parties to the writ petition or being granted an opportunity of being heard,” the plea added.
The petition said that any blanket demolition drive initiated without affording affected residents an adequate and meaningful opportunity of being heard would amount to a gross infraction of the principles of natural justice and a direct violation of fundamental rights enshrined under Articles 14, 19(1)(e), and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Residents claimed demolition despite valid documents
The petition further stated that “the group of affected residents whose homes fall within the area now sought to be demolished on the purported ground of being outside the PM-UDAY Scheme coverage, despite having valid title documents, proof of continuous possession before 2014, and eligibility under the Recognition of Property Rights Act, 2019.”
