Full Judgment Text
1
REPORTABLE
2025 INSC 610
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
EXTRAORDINARY APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.12199-12200/2025
KANIZ AHMED Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SABUDDIN & ORS. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner.
2. The High Court in Paras 21 and 22 of its impugned judgment and
order has observed thus:-
“21. Therefore, the police authorities are directed to
give notice to all the occupants to vacate the premises by
themselves by April 30, 2025. If any of them still
continued to remain in occupation, they shall be evicted
by deployment of adequate police force and such process
shall be completed by not later than May 16, 2025. After
the three floors are vacated, the KMC authority shall
initiate demolition proceedings for which also the police
authorities shall deploy adequate police force and such
demolition shall be completed and a report be filed before
this Court supported by photographs on June 19, 2025.
During the process of vacating the occupants of the
building as well as during the process of demolition, the
entire events shall be videographed and such cost shall be
borne by KMC.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
VISHAL ANAND
Date: 2025.05.01
13:29:53 IST
Reason:
22. Needless to state that this writ petition being a
public interest litigation, it goes without saying that
not only the construction, which has been put up by the
private respondents is to be dealt with, but the KMC
authority should also cause inspection of all the
2
neighbouring properties and if any violation is found, the
above directions will apply mutatis mutandis to such
constructions as well. Of course, action be taken after
issuing notice to the owners/occupants of those
properties”.
3. We are in complete agreement with what has been observed by the High
Court in the above referred paragraphs.
4. We admire the courage and conviction with which the High Court has
proceeded to take care of unauthorised construction in exercise of its
jurisdiction in public interest.
5. In one of our recent pronouncements, in the case of Rajendra Kumar
Barjatya and Another v. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad and Others reported
in 2024 INSC 990, we have made ourselves very explicitly clear that each
and every construction must be made scrupulously following and strictly
adhering to the rules and regulations. In the event of any violation,
being brought to the notice of the courts, the same should be dealt with
iron hands and any leniency or mercy shown to the person guilty of
unauthorised construction would amount to showing misplaced sympathy. In
our decision referred to above, we have issued the following directions:
“(i) While issuing the building planning permission, an
undertaking be obtained from the builder/applicant, as
the case may be, to the effect that possession of the
building will be entrusted and/or handed over to the
owners/beneficiaries only after obtaining
completion/occupation certificate from the authorities
concerned.
(ii) The builder/developer/owner shall cause to be
displayed at the construction site, a copy of the
approved plan during the entire period of construction
and the authorities concerned shall inspect the premises
periodically and maintain a record of such inspection in
their official records.
(iii) Upon conducting personal inspection and being
satisfied that the building is constructed in accordance
with the building planning permission given and there is
no deviation in such construction in any manner, the
completion/occupation certificate in respect of
residential / commercial building, be issued by the
authority concerned to the parties concerned, without
causing undue delay. If any deviation is noticed, action
must be taken in accordance with the Act and the process
of issuance of completion/occupation certificate should
be deferred, unless and until the deviations pointed out
are completely rectified.
3
(iv) All the necessary service connections, such as,
Electricity, water supply, sewerage connection, etc.,
shall be given by the service provider / Board to the
buildings only after the production of the
completion/occupation certificate.
(v) Even after issuance of completion certificate,
deviation / violation if any contrary to the planning
permission brought to the notice of the authority
immediate steps be taken by the said authority concerned,
in accordance with law, against the builder / owner /
occupant; and the official, who is responsible for
issuance of wrongful completion /occupation certificate
shall be proceeded departmentally forthwith.
(vi) No permission /licence to conduct any business/trade
must be given by any authorities including local bodies
of States/Union Territories in any unauthorized building
irrespective of it being residential or commercial
building.
(vii) The development must be in conformity with the
zonal plan and usage. Any modification to such zonal plan
and usage must be taken by strictly following the rules
in place and in consideration of the larger public
interest and the impact on the environment.
(viii) Whenever any request is made by the respective
authority under the planning department/local body for
co-operation from another department to take action
against any unauthorized construction, the latter shall
render immediate assistance and co-operation and any
delay or dereliction would be viewed seriously. The
States/UT must also take disciplinary action against the
erring officials once it is brought to their knowledge.
(ix) In the event of any application / appeal / revision
being filed by the owner or builder against the non-
issuance of completion certificate or for regularisation
of unauthorised construction or rectification of
deviation etc., the same shall be disposed of by the
authority concerned, including the pending appeals /
revisions, as expeditiously as possible, in any event not
later than 90 days as statutorily provided.
(x) If the authorities strictly adhere to the earlier
directions issued by this court and those being passed
today, they would have deterrent effect and the quantum
of litigation before the Tribunal / Courts relating to
house / building constructions would come down
drastically. Hence, necessary instructions should be
issued by all the State/UT Governments in the form of
Circular to all concerned with a warning that all
directions must be scrupulously followed and failure to
do so will be viewed seriously, with departmental action
being initiated against the erring officials as per law.
4
(xi) Banks / financial institutions shall sanction loan
against any building as a security only after verifying
the completion/occupation certificate issued to a
building on production of the same by the parties
concerned.
(xii) The violation of any of the directions would lead
to initiation of contempt proceedings in addition to the
prosecution under the respective laws.”
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
her client be given one chance to pray for regularisation of the
unauthorised construction. We do not find any merit in such submission. A
person who has no regards for the law cannot be permitted to pray for
regularisation after putting up unauthorised construction of two floors.
This has something to do with the rule of law. Unauthorised construction
has to be demolished. There is no way out. Judicial discretion would be
guided by expediency. Courts are not free from statutory fetters. Justice
is to be rendered in accordance with law. We are at pains to observe that
the aforesaid aspect has not been kept in mind by many State Governments
while enacting Regularisation of Unauthorized Development Act based on
payment of impact fees.
7. Thus, the Courts must adopt a strict approach while dealing with
cases of illegal construction and should not readily engage themselves in
judicial regularisation of buildings erected without requisite
permissions of the competent authority. The need for maintaining such a
firm stance emanates not only from inviolable duty cast upon the Courts
to uphold the rule of law, rather such judicial restraint gains more
force in order to facilitate the well-being of all concerned. The law
ought not to come to rescue of those who flout its rigours as allowing
the same might result in flourishing the culture of impunity. Put
otherwise, if the law were to protect the ones who endeavour to disregard
it, the same would lead to undermine the deterrent effect of laws, which
is the cornerstone of a just and orderly society.[See: Ashok Malhotra v.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi, W.P. (c) No. 10233 of 2024 (Delhi High
Court)]
8. The Special Leave Petitions stand dismissed.
9. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
5
10. Registry is directed to circulate one copy each of this order to all
the High Courts.
……………….…………………………J.
(J.B. PARDIWALA)
………………………………………….J.
(R. MAHADEVAN)
NEW DELHI.
th
30 APRIL 2025.
REPORTABLE
2025 INSC 610
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
EXTRAORDINARY APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.12199-12200/2025
KANIZ AHMED Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
SABUDDIN & ORS. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner.
2. The High Court in Paras 21 and 22 of its impugned judgment and
order has observed thus:-
“21. Therefore, the police authorities are directed to
give notice to all the occupants to vacate the premises by
themselves by April 30, 2025. If any of them still
continued to remain in occupation, they shall be evicted
by deployment of adequate police force and such process
shall be completed by not later than May 16, 2025. After
the three floors are vacated, the KMC authority shall
initiate demolition proceedings for which also the police
authorities shall deploy adequate police force and such
demolition shall be completed and a report be filed before
this Court supported by photographs on June 19, 2025.
During the process of vacating the occupants of the
building as well as during the process of demolition, the
entire events shall be videographed and such cost shall be
borne by KMC.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
VISHAL ANAND
Date: 2025.05.01
13:29:53 IST
Reason:
22. Needless to state that this writ petition being a
public interest litigation, it goes without saying that
not only the construction, which has been put up by the
private respondents is to be dealt with, but the KMC
authority should also cause inspection of all the
2
neighbouring properties and if any violation is found, the
above directions will apply mutatis mutandis to such
constructions as well. Of course, action be taken after
issuing notice to the owners/occupants of those
properties”.
3. We are in complete agreement with what has been observed by the High
Court in the above referred paragraphs.
4. We admire the courage and conviction with which the High Court has
proceeded to take care of unauthorised construction in exercise of its
jurisdiction in public interest.
5. In one of our recent pronouncements, in the case of Rajendra Kumar
Barjatya and Another v. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad and Others reported
in 2024 INSC 990, we have made ourselves very explicitly clear that each
and every construction must be made scrupulously following and strictly
adhering to the rules and regulations. In the event of any violation,
being brought to the notice of the courts, the same should be dealt with
iron hands and any leniency or mercy shown to the person guilty of
unauthorised construction would amount to showing misplaced sympathy. In
our decision referred to above, we have issued the following directions:
“(i) While issuing the building planning permission, an
undertaking be obtained from the builder/applicant, as
the case may be, to the effect that possession of the
building will be entrusted and/or handed over to the
owners/beneficiaries only after obtaining
completion/occupation certificate from the authorities
concerned.
(ii) The builder/developer/owner shall cause to be
displayed at the construction site, a copy of the
approved plan during the entire period of construction
and the authorities concerned shall inspect the premises
periodically and maintain a record of such inspection in
their official records.
(iii) Upon conducting personal inspection and being
satisfied that the building is constructed in accordance
with the building planning permission given and there is
no deviation in such construction in any manner, the
completion/occupation certificate in respect of
residential / commercial building, be issued by the
authority concerned to the parties concerned, without
causing undue delay. If any deviation is noticed, action
must be taken in accordance with the Act and the process
of issuance of completion/occupation certificate should
be deferred, unless and until the deviations pointed out
are completely rectified.
3
(iv) All the necessary service connections, such as,
Electricity, water supply, sewerage connection, etc.,
shall be given by the service provider / Board to the
buildings only after the production of the
completion/occupation certificate.
(v) Even after issuance of completion certificate,
deviation / violation if any contrary to the planning
permission brought to the notice of the authority
immediate steps be taken by the said authority concerned,
in accordance with law, against the builder / owner /
occupant; and the official, who is responsible for
issuance of wrongful completion /occupation certificate
shall be proceeded departmentally forthwith.
(vi) No permission /licence to conduct any business/trade
must be given by any authorities including local bodies
of States/Union Territories in any unauthorized building
irrespective of it being residential or commercial
building.
(vii) The development must be in conformity with the
zonal plan and usage. Any modification to such zonal plan
and usage must be taken by strictly following the rules
in place and in consideration of the larger public
interest and the impact on the environment.
(viii) Whenever any request is made by the respective
authority under the planning department/local body for
co-operation from another department to take action
against any unauthorized construction, the latter shall
render immediate assistance and co-operation and any
delay or dereliction would be viewed seriously. The
States/UT must also take disciplinary action against the
erring officials once it is brought to their knowledge.
(ix) In the event of any application / appeal / revision
being filed by the owner or builder against the non-
issuance of completion certificate or for regularisation
of unauthorised construction or rectification of
deviation etc., the same shall be disposed of by the
authority concerned, including the pending appeals /
revisions, as expeditiously as possible, in any event not
later than 90 days as statutorily provided.
(x) If the authorities strictly adhere to the earlier
directions issued by this court and those being passed
today, they would have deterrent effect and the quantum
of litigation before the Tribunal / Courts relating to
house / building constructions would come down
drastically. Hence, necessary instructions should be
issued by all the State/UT Governments in the form of
Circular to all concerned with a warning that all
directions must be scrupulously followed and failure to
do so will be viewed seriously, with departmental action
being initiated against the erring officials as per law.
4
(xi) Banks / financial institutions shall sanction loan
against any building as a security only after verifying
the completion/occupation certificate issued to a
building on production of the same by the parties
concerned.
(xii) The violation of any of the directions would lead
to initiation of contempt proceedings in addition to the
prosecution under the respective laws.”
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
her client be given one chance to pray for regularisation of the
unauthorised construction. We do not find any merit in such submission. A
person who has no regards for the law cannot be permitted to pray for
regularisation after putting up unauthorised construction of two floors.
This has something to do with the rule of law. Unauthorised construction
has to be demolished. There is no way out. Judicial discretion would be
guided by expediency. Courts are not free from statutory fetters. Justice
is to be rendered in accordance with law. We are at pains to observe that
the aforesaid aspect has not been kept in mind by many State Governments
while enacting Regularisation of Unauthorized Development Act based on
payment of impact fees.
7. Thus, the Courts must adopt a strict approach while dealing with
cases of illegal construction and should not readily engage themselves in
judicial regularisation of buildings erected without requisite
permissions of the competent authority. The need for maintaining such a
firm stance emanates not only from inviolable duty cast upon the Courts
to uphold the rule of law, rather such judicial restraint gains more
force in order to facilitate the well-being of all concerned. The law
ought not to come to rescue of those who flout its rigours as allowing
the same might result in flourishing the culture of impunity. Put
otherwise, if the law were to protect the ones who endeavour to disregard
it, the same would lead to undermine the deterrent effect of laws, which
is the cornerstone of a just and orderly society.[See: Ashok Malhotra v.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi, W.P. (c) No. 10233 of 2024 (Delhi High
Court)]
8. The Special Leave Petitions stand dismissed.
9. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
5
10. Registry is directed to circulate one copy each of this order to all
the High Courts.
……………….…………………………J.
(J.B. PARDIWALA)
………………………………………….J.
(R. MAHADEVAN)
NEW DELHI.
th
30 APRIL 2025.