Latest news with #Hegde
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- 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.
New Indian Express
2 days ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
SC refuses to hear plea against Assam's ‘push back' policy; asks petitioner to move Gauhati HC
The Supreme Court's vacation bench on Monday declined to entertain a plea challenging the Assam government's alleged 'push back' policy to detain and deport suspected foreigners without verifying their nationality or exhausting legal remedies. "We are not inclined to hear it. Sorry. Why are you not going to the Gauhati High Court?", the two-judge vacation bench of the top court, headed by Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma told the lawyer, Sanjay Hegde, appearing for the petitioner, All BTC Minority Students Union (ABMSU), to knock the doors of the HC for relief. Hegde told the top court that the plea was based and filed here on an order passed by the apex court earlier. When the court did not incline to pass any order on the plea, Hegde said the petitioner would like to withdraw the plea to take and ensure appropriate recourse before the high court. Allowing his request, the bench directed him to withdraw the plea. The plea has been filed in the Supreme Court on Saturday challenging the Assam government's reportedly launched "push back" policy of a "sweeping and indiscriminate drive" to detain and deport persons suspected to be foreigners without nationality verification or exhaustion of legal remedies. "The 'push back' policy, as implemented (by Assam govt) violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by deporting individuals without due process, thereby denying them the opportunity to contest their deportation and infringing upon their right to life and personal liberty," the plea of ABMSU claimed. This policy of "push back" - being executed in border districts like Dhubri, South Salmara and Goalpara - was not only legally indefensible but also threatens to render stateless numerous Indian citizens, especially those from poor and marginalised communities who were either declared foreigners ex-parte or have no access to legal aid to challenge their status, the plea claimed.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Supreme Court refuses to entertain plea over deportation drive in Assam, asks petitioner to approach High Court
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea which alleged that the Assam government has reportedly launched a "sweeping" drive to detain and deport persons suspected to be foreigners without nationality verification or exhaustion of legal remedies. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma told the petitioner to approach the Gauhati High Court in the matter. "Why are you not going to the Gauhati High Court?" the bench asked senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, who appeared for petitioner All BTC Minority Students Union. Hegde said the plea was based on an order passed by the apex court earlier. "Please go to the Gauhati High Court," the bench observed. Live Events Hegde said the petitioner would withdraw the plea to take appropriate recourse before the high court. The bench allowed him to withdraw the plea. The plea, filed through advocate Adeel Ahmed, referred to a February 4 order of the top court which, while dealing with a separate petition, had directed Assam to initiate the process of deportation of 63 declared foreign nationals, whose nationality was known, within two weeks. "Pursuant to the said order (of February 4)... the state of Assam has reportedly launched a sweeping and indiscriminate drive to detain and deport individuals suspected to be foreigners, even in the absence of foreigners tribunal declarations, nationality verification, or exhaustion of legal remedies," the plea claimed. It referred to news reports, including one about a retired school teacher who was allegedly " pushed back " into Bangladesh . "These instances reflect a growing pattern of deportations conducted by the Assam Police and administrative machinery through informal 'push back' mechanisms, without any judicial oversight or adherence to the safeguards envisaged by the Constitution of India or this court," it claimed. "The 'push back' policy, as implemented, violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by deporting individuals without due process, thereby denying them the opportunity to contest their deportation and infringing upon their right to life and personal liberty," the plea claimed. It alleged that the indiscriminate application of deportation directives, coupled with absence of proper identification, verification and notice mechanisms, has resulted in a situation where Indian citizens were being wrongfully incarcerated and threatened with removal to foreign territories without lawful basis. The plea sought a direction that no person shall be deported pursuant to the February 4 order without a prior reasoned declaration by the foreigners tribunal, without adequate opportunity of appeal or review and verification of nationality by the Ministry of External Affairs. It also sought a declaration that the "push back" policy adopted by Assam was violative of Articles 14 ( equality before law ) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution and contrary to binding judicial precedents.
The Print
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Print
SC refuses to entertain plea over deportation drive in Assam, asks petitioner to approach HC
'Why are you not going to the Gauhati High Court?' the bench asked senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, who appeared for petitioner All BTC Minority Students Union. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma told the petitioner to approach the Gauhati High Court in the matter. New Delhi, Jun 2 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea which alleged that the Assam government has reportedly launched a 'sweeping' drive to detain and deport persons suspected to be foreigners without nationality verification or exhaustion of legal remedies. Hegde said the plea was based on an order passed by the apex court earlier. 'Please go to the Gauhati High Court,' the bench observed. Hegde said the petitioner would withdraw the plea to take appropriate recourse before the high court. The bench allowed him to withdraw the plea. The plea, filed through advocate Adeel Ahmed, referred to a February 4 order of the top court which, while dealing with a separate petition, had directed Assam to initiate the process of deportation of 63 declared foreign nationals, whose nationality was known, within two weeks. 'Pursuant to the said order (of February 4)… the state of Assam has reportedly launched a sweeping and indiscriminate drive to detain and deport individuals suspected to be foreigners, even in the absence of foreigners tribunal declarations, nationality verification, or exhaustion of legal remedies,' the plea claimed. It referred to news reports, including one about a retired school teacher who was allegedly 'pushed back' into Bangladesh. 'These instances reflect a growing pattern of deportations conducted by the Assam Police and administrative machinery through informal 'push back' mechanisms, without any judicial oversight or adherence to the safeguards envisaged by the Constitution of India or this court,' it claimed. 'The 'push back' policy, as implemented, violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by deporting individuals without due process, thereby denying them the opportunity to contest their deportation and infringing upon their right to life and personal liberty,' the plea claimed. It alleged that the indiscriminate application of deportation directives, coupled with absence of proper identification, verification and notice mechanisms, has resulted in a situation where Indian citizens were being wrongfully incarcerated and threatened with removal to foreign territories without lawful basis. The plea sought a direction that no person shall be deported pursuant to the February 4 order without a prior reasoned declaration by the foreigners tribunal, without adequate opportunity of appeal or review and verification of nationality by the Ministry of External Affairs. It also sought a declaration that the 'push back' policy adopted by Assam was violative of Articles 14 (equality before law) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution and contrary to binding judicial precedents. PTI ABA ABA DV DV This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
SC refuses to entertain plea over deportation drive in Assam, asks petitioner to approach HC
New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea which alleged that the Assam government has reportedly launched a "sweeping" drive to detain and deport persons suspected to be foreigners without nationality verification or exhaustion of legal remedies. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma told the petitioner to approach the Gauhati High Court in the matter. "Why are you not going to the Gauhati High Court?" the bench asked senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, who appeared for petitioner All BTC Minority Students Union. Hegde said the plea was based on an order passed by the apex court earlier. "Please go to the Gauhati High Court," the bench observed. Hegde said the petitioner would withdraw the plea to take appropriate recourse before the high court. The bench allowed him to withdraw the plea. The plea, filed through advocate Adeel Ahmed, referred to a February 4 order of the top court which, while dealing with a separate petition, had directed Assam to initiate the process of deportation of 63 declared foreign nationals, whose nationality was known, within two weeks. "Pursuant to the said order ... the state of Assam has reportedly launched a sweeping and indiscriminate drive to detain and deport individuals suspected to be foreigners, even in the absence of foreigners tribunal declarations, nationality verification, or exhaustion of legal remedies," the plea claimed. It referred to news reports, including one about a retired school teacher who was allegedly "pushed back" into Bangladesh. "These instances reflect a growing pattern of deportations conducted by the Assam Police and administrative machinery through informal 'push back' mechanisms, without any judicial oversight or adherence to the safeguards envisaged by the Constitution of India or this court," it claimed. "The 'push back' policy, as implemented, violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by deporting individuals without due process, thereby denying them the opportunity to contest their deportation and infringing upon their right to life and personal liberty," the plea claimed. It alleged that the indiscriminate application of deportation directives, coupled with absence of proper identification, verification and notice mechanisms, has resulted in a situation where Indian citizens were being wrongfully incarcerated and threatened with removal to foreign territories without lawful basis. The plea sought a direction that no person shall be deported pursuant to the February 4 order without a prior reasoned declaration by the foreigners tribunal, without adequate opportunity of appeal or review and verification of nationality by the Ministry of External Affairs. It also sought a declaration that the "push back" policy adopted by Assam was violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and contrary to binding judicial precedents.
