NEW DELHI: Supreme Courtroom on Friday refused to order establishment on alleged unlawful demolition drive towards properties of Muslims, together with a century-old mosque, close to Somnath temple, as Gujarat govt mentioned it acted as per legislation to take away encroachments on govt land abutting the seashore. It mentioned, “If we discover they (govt) are in contempt of SC’s Sept 17 order, we’ll order establishment ante (reconstruction of the constructions as they existed).”
SC: If Sept 17 order flouted, will order restoration of constructions
A Muslim organisation, ‘Summast Patni Muslim Jamat’, by way of senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, alleged the demolition drive was carried out within the wee hours of Sept 28 to raze 9 spiritual constructions, together with mosques, dargahs and mausoleums, together with houses of 45 caretakers.
The organisation sought initiation of contempt proceedings towards IAS officer Rajesh Munjhu for finishing up the drive that was in breach of the SC’s Sept 17 omnibus course that “there shall be no demolition wherever throughout the nation with out in search of go away of this courtroom”.
Terming the declare as “fallacious and deceptive”, solicitor common Tushar Mehta on behalf of Gujarat mentioned the demolition drive was carried out strictly in accordance with legislation to take away encroachments on govt land abutting the Prabhas Patan seashore. He mentioned proceedings for the elimination of encroachments commenced in 2023 and private listening to was accorded to all affected individuals. “The encroached space is simply 360 metres from Somnath temple and abuts the seashore, which is a water physique,” he mentioned.
When Hegde repeatedly sought a keep on the demolition drive or upkeep of establishment of the prevailing properties, Mehta advised the bench that Gujarat govt will file an in depth response to every allegation. Mehta mentioned the petitioner has suppressed the truth that a number of the affected individuals had moved HC and their plea for keep on the drive was rejected after an in depth listening to.
The bench mentioned although it had banned demolition drives, it had exempted elimination of encroachments/unauthorised constructions in “any public place resembling street, avenue, footpath abutting railway line or any river physique or water our bodies and likewise to instances the place there may be an order for demolition made by a courtroom of legislation”. The bench mentioned, “If we discover that they’re in contempt of SC’s Sept 17 order, we’ll order establishment ante (reconstruction of the constructions as they existed previous to demolition).” The subsequent listening to is on on Oct 16.
