Supreme Court to Railways: Maintain status quo on demolition drive in Mathura

New Delhi [India]: The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed to maintain status quo until further orders on the demolition drive of alleged encroachments on railway land near the Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi in Uttar Pradesh’s Mathura.

A bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose, Sanjay Kumar, and SVN Bhatti passed the order granting interim relief to the petitioner till further order. The court also issued notice to the respondents in the matter.

Senior Advocate Prashanto Chandra Sen who appeared for the petitioner said that on August 9, the authorities started demolition, and people have been living there since the 1800s.

Petitioners were represented by advocates Radha Tarkar and Aaron Shaw.

The petitioner has sought to stay the process of demolition by the railway authorities in Mathura. The petitioner filed a civil suit before the Civil Court Senior Division, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, seeking a permanent injunction against the railway authority, but in the meantime, on August 9 this year, demolition work commenced.

The same was challenged the very next day, August 10. The Counsel for the Railway had submitted on August 10 that he does not have any instructions for the demolition and accordingly submitted before the Civil Court that he would come with instructions, the petitioner said.

However, all court proceedings in Allahabad are suspended today pursuant to a resolution passed by the Bar Council on account of the shooting of an advocate, the petitioner said.

They have approached the Civil Court as well as the High Court, but all the courts are closed and they could not pursue the issue, the petitioner said. And taking advantage of the situation, the Railway Authority has initiated the process of demolishing the house of the petitioners in the most arbitrary manner, the petitioner claimed.

The petitioner has tried their level best to pursue the matter before the Civil Court and the High Court, but due to the Courts being closed, they could not pursue the matter there, and as such, they are compelled to approach the top court and urge the apex court to issue a direction to stay the demolition where they have been staying since 1880.