The Supreme Court has once again reprimanded the UP government over bulldozer action. The court said, he can order to rebuild the houses dropped in Prayagraj at the expense of the government.
,
According to the report of the Bar and Bench- Prayagraj’s lawyer Zulfikar Haider, Professor Ali Ahmed, two women and another person knocked on the Supreme Court.
All these houses were on the same plot in front of them. His house was dropped a day after receiving the notice in March 2021. Neither was given time to give notice, nor got the opportunity of legal rescue. The victims say that the state government accidentally accepted their land as the property of gangster Atik Ahmed.
Now read in detail …
This way sabotage is shocking
The case was heard on 5 March, the report of which came out today, on Thursday. The bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice N. Kotishwar Singh said, “Such sabotage is shocking and gives a wrong indication.” It requires improvement. Attorney General R Venkatramani appeared on behalf of the state government. He said, he said, due to giving notice to demolish the property of the petitioners.
On this, Justice Abhay S Oka said that under Article 21, any person can be denied his life and personal freedom according to the procedure fixed in the law. He said-
You are taking such rigorous action to demolish homes and one of them is a lawyer and the other is a professor. We know how to deal with a very technical arguments like this? Finally, Article 21 and ‘Right to Agery’ is something.
Atik Ahmed’s land was understood Advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari was arguing on behalf of the victims. He said, there was a gangster named Atik Ahmed, who was murdered in 2023. He understood our land as our land. They (the state) should accept their mistake.
The Attorney General said, the petitioners were given appropriate time to respond to the notice. But Justice Oka did not agree. He said, why the notice was pasted like this? Why was not sent by courier? Anyone will give notice and vandalize this way. This is a case of sabotage that includes atrocities. You say that there is no process to send by post. Notice has been sent here by post.
Attorney General said- I am not defending sabotage The Attorney General said, there is a dispute on whether the person was there at the time of giving the notice. I am not defending sabotage, but the High Court should be allowed to consider it.
Venkataramani said, the matter should be sent to the High Court to consider a fresh considering. But the Supreme Court did not agree. Justice said, should not go to the High Court again. Then there will be more delay in the case.
Supreme Court said- home will have to be rebuilt The Supreme Court said, the houses that were dropped will have to be rebuilt. If you want to challenge it, you can fight a legal battle by filing an affidavit. But if you do not want to collide directly, then there is another way that is less embarrassing. Let them (victims) first complete construction and then issue notices to them under the law. The Supreme Court spoke about the next hearing on 21 March.
These petitions were filed through advocate Rohini Dua on behalf of the victims. The petitioners had argued that the land on which these houses were built were its lease holders. The administration took this action by linking the place with mafia and politician Atik Ahmed.
Allahabad High Court rejected petition Earlier, the petition was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court. The High Court on record of the state government’s statement that the land was Nazul Land. It was to be used for public work.
The lease released since 1906 ended in 1996. The petitioners had applied for free-holding lease hold. Those applications have been rejected in 2015 and 2019. In such a situation, illegal occupation was removed through bulldozer action.
Notice on the night of 6 March, the house was broken the next day A total of 5 people, including Professor Ali Ahmed and advocate Zulfikar Haider, were demolished on Sunday, 7 March 2021. The petitioners told the court that he was given notice on the night of Saturday, March 6. However, the date of March 1 was written on the notice. The petitioners said that the land on which these houses were built were its lease holders.
……………… also read this news-
Maulana furious at Shami’s energy drink, said- said in Bareilly, said- did not keep fasting, it should not have been done.
Maulana Shahabuddin Rajvi of UP’s Bareilly expressed displeasure with Team India fast bowler Mohammed Shami. He says that Shami did not keep Rosa in Ramadan, which is a crime. He is a criminal in the eyes of Sharia. They should not have done this.
In fact, on Tuesday, Shami was seen drinking energy drinks on the ground during the match against Australia. Maulana Shahabuddin Rajvi, National President of All India Muslim Jamaat, released the video on Thursday.
