Don’t allow bulldozer culture to enter Maharashtra, this is not UP or Bihar: Bombay HC
CHHATRAPATI SAMBHAJINAGAR: The Bombay High Court’s Aurangabad bench on Monday criticised Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Municipal Corporation for demolishing properties linked to AIMIM corporator Mateen Patel and resident Hanif Khan, calling the action arbitrary and in violation of Supreme Court and high court guidelines.A division bench led by Justice Siddheshwar Thombre, hearing petitions by Patel and Khan, made sharp oral observations on the May 13 demolition drive.“Constructing a house is not an easy task. Everybody cannot afford to build a house like you and me. Don’t allow bulldozer culture to enter Maharashtra. This is not UP or Bihar,” the bench remarked.The court noted that mandatory safeguards — including a 15-day notice period prescribed by the Supreme Court — were not followed. “No compliance with the last notice was made. The action is arbitrary. The action has made the entire family homeless,” the bench said.It also questioned whether Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar Municipal Corporation (CSMC) had identified specific illegal portions before razing entire structures. “The authorities should have scrutinised which part or portion of the house was illegal,” the court observed.“As per the Supreme Court, 15-day time ought to have been given. The same was not done,” it added.The matter has been posted for further hearing on June 15.The remarks came after assistant government pleader Sambhaji Tope, appearing for CSMC, argued that the petitions had become infructuous since the structures were already demolished and suggested the petitioners seek civil remedies in a lower court.The civic body had demolished Patel’s residence and office on May 13, along with a house allegedly used by a TCS employee evading arrest in a criminal case. The drive sparked controversy after adjacent properties, including a building material shop owned by Amjad Khan and a house in Patel’s father’s name, were also razed without prior intimation.Amjad Khan claimed his shop had valid permissions under the Gunthewari regularisation scheme and alleged losses exceeding Rs 20 lakh.Counsel for the petitioners, advocates Abhaysinh Bhosle and Krushna Rodge, told the court that the demolition was carried out despite assurances that due legal procedure would be followed.
