Conviction Under Section 326 IPC Requires Proof of ‘Dangerous Weapon’ – Supreme Court Modifies Conviction to Section 325 IPC Marital Disputes Must Not Become Never-Ending Legal Battles – Supreme Court Ends 12-Year-Long Litigation with Final Settlement Denial of Pre-Charge Evidence is a Violation of Fair Trial: Supreme Court Restores Complainant’s Right to Testify Slum Redevelopment Cannot Be Held Hostage by a Few Dissenters – Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to Eviction Notices Termination of Judicial Probationers Without Inquiry Violates Principles of Natural Justice – Allahabad High Court Quashes Discharge Orders A Celebrity’s Name is Not Public Property – No One Can Exploit It Without Consent – High Court Bars Release of Film Titled ‘Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar’ Truck Driver's Negligence Fully Established – No Contributory Negligence by Car Driver: Delhi High Court Enhances Compensation in Fatal Accident Case Stamp Duty Demand After 15 Years is Legally Unsustainable – Karnataka High Court Quashes Proceedings Licensees Cannot Claim Adverse Possession, Says Kerala High Court No Evidence Directly Implicating Acquitted Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Acquittal in ₹55 Lakh Bank Fraud Compensatory Aspect of Cheque Bounce Cases Must Be Given Priority Over Punishment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Income Tax | Transfer Pricing Adjustments Must Be Based on Economic Reality, Not Hypothetical Comparisons: Delhi High Court Sanction Under Section 197 CrPC is a Legal Mandate, Not a Mere Technicality: Kerala High Court Quashes Proceedings Against Police Officers Bail Cannot Be Granted When Prima Facie Evidence Links Accused to Terrorist Activities—Andhra Pradesh High Court Denies Bail Under UAPA" Statutory Bail Cannot Be Cancelled Without Justifiable Grounds—Calcutta High Court Reinstates Bail for NIA Case Accused Juvenile Justice Cannot Be Ignored for Heinous Crimes—Bail to Minor in Murder Case Upheld: Delhi High Court Litigants Cannot Sleep Over Their Rights and Wake Up at the Last Minute: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Plea to Reopen Ex-Parte Case After 16 Years Economic Offenses With Deep-Rooted Conspiracies Must Be Treated Differently—Bail Cannot Be Granted Lightly: Chhattisgarh High Court Denies Bail in ₹5.39 Crore Money Laundering Case Tenant Cannot Deny Landlord’s Title Once Property Is Sold—Eviction Upheld: Jharkhand High Court Pending Criminal Case Cannot Be a Ground to Deny Passport Renewal Unless Cognizance Is Taken by Court: Karnataka High Court Conviction Cannot Rest on Suspicion—Kerala High Court Acquits Mother and Son in Murder Case Over Flawed Evidence Seized Assets Cannot Be Released During Trial—Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Gali Janardhan Reddy’s Plea for Gold and Bonds Remarriage Cannot Disqualify a Widow From Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Unregistered Sale Agreement Gives No Right to Possession—Madras High Court Rejects Injunction Against Property Owners

Andhra High Court Halt Demolition of YSRCP Office : Demolition Only If Public Interest or Safety Is Affected

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Andhra High Court Stresses Due Process and Fair Hearing Before Demolition of Alleged Unauthorized Constructions on Leased Land for Party Offices.

In a recent landmark decision, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, presided over by Justice B. Krishna Mohan, has directed the state authorities to follow due process before proceeding with the demolition of buildings constructed by the Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP). The judgment underscores the necessity of adhering to principles of natural justice and fair hearing in administrative actions, specifically in cases involving alleged unauthorized constructions on leased land meant for party offices.

The petitioners, YSRCP, represented by its State General Secretary Leila Appi Reddy and District President Pyla Narasimhaiah, challenged the provisional demolition orders issued by various municipal and urban development authorities across Andhra Pradesh. These orders targeted buildings constructed on leased government land, alleging unauthorized constructions. The YSRCP argued that their constructions were compliant with legal requirements and sought regularization of any deviations.

The court highlighted the need for respondent authorities to verify records and consider the petitioners' explanations before taking any coercive steps. "The power of demolition should not be resorted to unless overwhelming public interest is involved," stated Justice B. Krishna Mohan, emphasizing the significance of acting fairly and objectively in consonance with the law.

Justice B. Krishna Mohan reinforced the requirement for due process and fair hearing in administrative actions. The court noted, "The petitioners' buildings were constructed by complying with all required provisions of law, and any alleged violations are curable defects." The judgment stressed that demolitions should only occur if deviations are not in public interest or cause public nuisance or danger.

The judgment extensively discussed the principles of evaluating administrative actions in urban development cases. It reiterated that administrative authorities must provide opportunities for parties to present their cases fully. "At every stage of the proceedings, a due opportunity of hearing shall be given to the petitioners," the court directed, ensuring transparency and fairness in decision-making processes.

Justice B. Krishna Mohan remarked, "The power of demolition should be exercised only if the deviations made during the construction are not in public interest or hazardous to public safety. Minor, minimal, or trivial deviations that do not affect the public at large should not result in demolition."

The Andhra Pradesh High Court's decision is a significant affirmation of the judiciary's role in safeguarding due process and fairness in administrative actions. By mandating that authorities follow due procedure and provide fair hearings, the judgment ensures that actions taken against alleged unauthorized constructions are just and lawful. This decision is expected to influence future cases, reinforcing the legal framework for addressing issues of urban development and unauthorized constructions.

 

Date of Decision: July 04, 2024

Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party (YSRCP) vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Others

Similar News