Strong, glaring case needed for interim order: SC to petitioners challenging Waqf Amendment Act
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday said that there was a presumption of constitutional validity in favour of every statute passed by the Centre and told the petitioners that if they want interim relief, then they must make a very strong and glaring case, while hearing a batch of pleas challenging the Waqf Amendment Act, 2025.
A bench of the top court was hearing a batch of petitions challenging the Waqf (Amendment) Act 2025 on the question of passing interim orders.
During the hearing, the two-judge bench of the apex court, led by Chief Justice of India Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih orally observed that for a stay of the statute, a strong case has to be shown.
"There is a presumption of constitutionality in favour of every statute. For interim relief, you have to make out a very strong and glaring case. Otherwise, presumption of constitutionality will be there," CJI Gavai said.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for one of the petitioners, told the apex court that they have a strong prima facie case and asserted that "irreparable injury will be caused if the provisions are activated."
The arguments were inconclusive on Tuesday and would continue on Wednesday, when the Centre will argue defending the Waqf amendment act.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Home Minister's remarks on West Bengal CM opposing Operation Sindoor incorrect and motivated, says TMC
The Trinamool Congress on Monday said that the remarks by Union Home Minister Amit Shah that West Bengal Chief Minister and party chairperson had opposed 'Operation Sindoor' was 'factually incorrect and politically motivated'. The West Bengal's ruling party took to social media and shared video of the speech of the Home Minister made in Kolkata on June 1 as well as remarks made by the Chief Minister on Operation Sindoor on three days May 9, May 19 and May 29. 'Smt. @MamataOfficial has always stood by our armed forces and backed every national interest with full @abhishekaitc, as part of India's delegation, has represented our firm stand against terrorism on the global stage. HM @AmitShah should've done his homework before spreading lies!' the Trinamool Congress shared on X. In a statement the Trinamool Congress said that 'the CM has consistently backed national security initiatives, including Operation Sindoor' .'The party provided records confirming her support for the Centre's actions against terrorism. AITC also pointed out that Abhishek Banerjee was nominated as part of the official Indian delegation representing the nation's position on the global stage showing how serious the party was with Operation Sindoor,' the statement added. On June 1, the Home Minister Amit Shah had accused the Trinamool Congress chairperson of opposing 'Operation Sindoor' to 'appease the Muslim vote bank'. Ms. Banerjee had expressed support for India's response to the Pahalgam terror attack, stating that she stood 'shoulder-to-shoulder' with the Union government in the fight against terrorism. She had nominated her nephew and Diamond Harbour MP Abhishek Banerjee to be part of one of the all party delegations visiting foreign countries and highlighting the country's stand against terrorism. A war of words between the Trinamool Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party over the issue started on May 29, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi at a public rally targeted the Trinamool Congress government on several counts including the recruitment scam and the communal riots at Murshidabad. The Chief Minister launched a scathing attack on the Prime Minister and accused him of politicising 'Operation Sindoor'. Three days after the Prime Minister's rally the Home Minister also targeted the Trinamool Congress government on similar fronts but accused the Chief Minister of opposing ' Operation Sindoor'.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Supreme Court defers Batla House plea, declines stay on demolition
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the impending demolition of homes and shops in Delhi's Batla House area, observing that its earlier order of May 7 – directing action against unauthorised construction, did not warrant any interference at this stage. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma, hearing a plea filed by over 40 residents, declined interim protection against the demolition drive being undertaken by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and the Uttar Pradesh Irrigation Department, but agreed to list the matter in July, once the court resumes full functioning after the summer vacation. 'It is our order and we have seen it… You take instructions if you would want us to simply adjourn this,' the bench told senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, appearing for the residents, while referring to the earlier direction of the apex court from May 7. 'We are telling you that we have seen the papers. We can adjourn it. That is all we can do,' said the bench, making it clear that the court was not inclined to examine the issue substantively during the summer vacation. Hegde urged the bench to at least clarify that no demolitions should be carried out in the interim. 'Let nothing happen in the meantime,' he said. But the court stood firm. 'You will be taking a risk if you want to argue this,' the bench warned, reiterating that it would not hear the matter during the vacation and asking Hegde to 'take instructions.' After consulting his clients, Hegde asked that the matter be listed in the week after the summer recess. The court agreed. The partial working schedule of the Supreme Court ends on July 13, after which regular hearings resume. Hegde informed the bench that the petitioners would approach the appropriate appellate authority to challenge the demolition notices. The dispute stems from a May 7 ruling by another bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, which directed that unauthorised constructions outside the boundaries of colonies regularised under the 2019 Pradhan Mantri-Unauthorized Colonies in Delhi Awas Adhikar Yojana (PM-UDAY) be demolished. The order said residents should be given 'at least 15 days' notice' and allowed to 'adopt appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.' Acting on the order, DDA issued eviction notices dated May 26, which were pasted on several buildings in Batla House. The notices, marked by large red Xs, stated: 'This building/structure has been found to be an illegal/unauthorised structure falling in khasra number 279, village Okhla, outside PMA-UDAY colony boundary… occupants are hereby directed to vacate the premises within 15 days… the demolition programme shall be carried out from 11-06-2025 without any further notice.' With the demolition set to begin just days before Eid-ul-Adha, anxiety has spread through the predominantly Muslim neighbourhood. Many residents, in their plea, said they have lived in the area for decades and view the notices as arbitrary and unjust. In their plea before the top court, residents argue that the 15-day notice was not meaningfully served. Instead of individual communication or clear deadlines, the notices were simply pasted on buildings, offering no scope for redress. They claim the demolition drive is arbitrary, illegal, and in breach of the protections under the PM-UDAY scheme. While DDA and the UP Irrigation Department claim the affected area lies outside the scheme's boundary, residents insist they qualify for regularisation or at the very least deserve a chance to be heard. The petitioners say they are legitimate homeowners with long-standing possession, and that no individualised assessment of legality was made before marking homes for demolition. The residents had first approached the Supreme Court on May 29. At the time, the court advised them to move Delhi High Court. But the petitioners pointed out that the authorities were relying on the Supreme Court's May 7 order to justify the imminent demolitions, leaving them with no choice but to return to the top court. The bench then directed the registry to list the matter this week. Batla House, part of the Jamia Nagar locality, has long been a densely populated working-class enclave. It first drew national attention in 2008 after a controversial police encounter resulted in the deaths of two alleged terrorists and a Delhi Police inspector. Now, the looming demolition has brought it back into the spotlight. With Monday's development, the matter now rests in limbo until July. Meanwhile, the 15-day notice period, expiring on June 10, leaves affected families facing an uncertain and anxious wait, coinciding with one of the year's biggest religious festivals.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Even as SC hears case, road from Haryana to Rajasthan for illegal mining rebuilt
Gurgaon: Between Supreme Court hearings and five months after the Haryana forest department razed it, an illegal road connecting Basai Meo in Nuh to Gadhaner in Rajasthan was rebuilt by miners. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It was this 6km road, originally built in Oct 2024, that led the miners through the Aravali forests to a hillock in Nuh's Rava. TOI reported in Dec last year that the Rava hillock was blasted into pieces and the stones were then transported across state borders through the same road. The matter of illegal mining and construction of the road eventually reached the Supreme Court, which pulled up Haryana's chief secretary last month for failing to act against those violating environmental laws in the state. On Monday, the forest department blocked the road once again. "This is the same road that was illegally built last year under the pretext of village land consolidation," a forest official said, adding: "We have now blocked it again and filed an FIR against two villagers involved in its reconstruction. We have increased surveillance as well." The area where the road was built falls under sections 4 and 5 of the Punjab Land Preservation Act (PLPA), which prohibits any construction in forests. It also violates Section 2 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, which bars construction in protected forests without approval of the central govt. The forest department official told TOI no such permissions were obtained. Experts said the road being carved through the Aravalis for a second time despite an ongoing case in the Supreme Court shows the impunity with which mining is carried out in the area. "The fact that a road is being carved through protected forest land while the matter is sub judice reflects blatant disregard for the rule of law. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now It underscores a systemic failure in enforcement and a culture of impunity that emboldens violators. If such violations can occur under the court's watch, one can only imagine the unchecked damage happening elsewhere," said Debadityo Sinha, lead (climate and ecosystems) at Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. The matter first came to light in Oct 2024, when Basai Meo residents alleged that the road was illegally constructed on forest and farm lands, disrupting natural drainage system of the area. A month later, villagers filed a petition before SC, alleging that the road was built by mining mafia "in collusion" with officials. On the night of Dec 19, miners flattened the hillock in Rava, just 10km from Basai Meo. Locals said they had heard the blast and some eyewitnesses captured videos of it. TOI also reported about the incident on Dec 23. Forest officials believe mined stones from Rava were taken to Rajasthan's Gadhaner through this road. "Mining the Aravalis is banned in Nuh, but there is no such prohibition in Rajasthan. This allows the miners to sell the stones, used in the construction industry, after crossing the state borders," said Sunil Harsana, an ecologist. The forest department, in Jan 2025, blocked the road to stop all illegal activities. It also ordered an FIR to be registered against three revenue officials for allowing this construction to take place in the Nuh village. The Supreme Court, hearing the petition, directed the central empowered committee (CEC) to investigate the allegations. CEC, in its report, confirmed the violations and recommended action against erring officials. Last month, Haryana's chief secretary filed an affidavit that said the state's forest department did not act against violations. The top court did not agree, and in its latest hearing on May 29, it pulled up the chief secretary for "passing the buck" to the forest department and not taking action against other officials. "It appears that (mining) mafia is strong enough to protect not only its members but also the officers of the state govt who acted in collusion with them," Chief Justice of India B R Gavai said. On Monday, environmentalists said repeated violations of norms in the Aravalis was alarming. "Aravalis are not just ancient hills, they are the lungs of northern India. Every illegal encroachment, every tree felled, is a blow to our future. Protecting them is not a choice, it is a necessity. Construction of a road through Aravalis is illegal and it also fragments the eco-sensitive zone," said Vaishali Rana, an activist.
