Supreme Court Issues Notice in Contempt Plea Against Mumbai Municipal Corporation Over Gurudwara Demolition
In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Thursday issued a notice on a petition seeking contempt proceedings against officials of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) regarding the demolition of a Gurudwara. The apex court also directed the parties to maintain the status quo until the next hearing.
The case was heard by a bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan, who issued notices to the respondents involved in the matter. The petition was filed by Pravin Jivan Walodra and represented by Advocate Soumya Priyadarshinee. The petitioner has alleged that the officials of the MCGM violated prior Supreme Court orders that had explicitly prohibited demolition activities.
Violation of Supreme Court Orders
The petition highlights that the demolition of the Gurudwara took place on October 15, 2024, despite interim orders issued by the Supreme Court on September 17 and October 1, 2024. These orders had clearly directed that no demolitions should occur during the stipulated period. The petitioner has accused the officials of defying these directives, which constitutes contempt of court.
The petitioner further argued that the actions of the officials infringe upon the constitutional right to shelter guaranteed to the citizens. This demolition, according to the plea, disregards fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of India, thereby causing irreparable harm to the affected individuals.
Allegations Against MCGM Officials
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, a statutory body under the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), has come under scrutiny for its role in the demolition. The petitioner has urged the court to initiate contempt proceedings against the officials responsible for this alleged violation of the court’s orders.
Court’s Directions
In response, the Supreme Court has directed the respondents to provide their explanations and maintain the status quo until the next date of hearing. The bench emphasized the importance of adherence to court orders and the need to safeguard constitutional rights, particularly in cases involving fundamental rights like shelter.
Broader Implications
This case underscores the critical importance of judicial oversight in ensuring compliance with court orders. It also brings to light the challenges faced by individuals and religious institutions in protecting their rights against administrative actions. The Supreme Court’s intervention highlights the judiciary’s role as the guardian of constitutional rights.
The matter is expected to see further developments in the coming hearings, as the court examines the allegations and responses from the MCGM officials. For now, the order to maintain the status quo serves as a temporary reprieve for the affected parties.
