Demolition notice to Nashik dargah stayed by SC; seeks notice from HC
text_fields
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday halted the demolition notice issued by the Nashik Municipal Corporation (NMC) concerning an allegedly unauthorized structure surrounding the Hazrat Satpeer Sayed Baba Dargah. The court also asked the Registrar General of the Bombay High Court to clarify whether the plea challenging the April 1 notice was refused to be listed and heard.
The Dargah Trust had filed a writ petition with the Bombay High Court on April 7, seeking to annul the NMC's notice, which ordered the demolition of the structure within 15 days.
The Trust expressed concern that if they failed to follow the notice’s instructions, the civic authorities would proceed with the demolition on April 15, Indian Express reported.
On Tuesday night, tensions escalated as a crowd clashed with police after NMC officials began demolishing the disputed structure.
The following day, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices P S Narsimha and Joymalya Bagchi was informed by senior advocate Navin Pahwa, representing the Trust, that the matter was urgent since the decades-old dargah in Kathe Galli, Nashik, was at risk of being demolished at any moment.
Pahwa stated that the Trust’s petition had been pending for listing since April 8, but the Bombay High Court had consistently declined to schedule a hearing.
The petitioner noted that a writ plea — a written request for an urgent hearing — was submitted on April 8, asking for the plea to be listed the next day for interim relief, but the high court did not grant the request for urgent listing.
While putting a hold on the demolition notice, the Supreme Court expressed confusion over what had occurred between April 9 and April 16. The court scheduled the next hearing on the Dargah Trust’s Special Leave Petition (SLP) for April 21.
The bench explained that it was taking this unusual step based on the senior advocate’s assertion that daily efforts had been made to get the case listed. However, the court expressed doubt over the claim, noting that it was difficult to believe the High Court would refuse to list the matter despite repeated requests.
Describing the allegation as serious, the Supreme Court emphasized that the counsel making the claim would be held accountable for its implications. It also directed the High Court registry to submit a report detailing the status of the plea’s listing.
