The Supreme Court on Wednesday (August 12, 2026) backed an NGO’s petition that lakhs of families pay municipal taxes for years, they are provided electricity and water connections, and allowed to convert their properties to free holds only to be thrown out into the streets one fine day by the State after their homes are demolished as illegal structures.

A three-judge Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India Surya Kant asked the Union and State governments to consider a petition filed by an NGO, the Centre for Law and Good Governance, seeking the formulation of a uniform policy for demolition of unauthorised constructions and simultaneous rehabilitation of the affected families.

Chief Justice Kant highlighted that demolition and rehabilitation are the “twin responsibilities” of the government in a welfare democracy. One should not be without the other, the CJI said.

“If you [the state] want to demolish, you have to provide rehabilitation for people affected by your action. It is a twin responsibility. If you want to demolish an unauthorised construction, the question for the government is ‘do you also have a policy for their rehabilitation?’” Chief Justice Kant observed.

The top court acknowledged that the authority of the state to demolish long-standing family homes after branding them unauthorised structures must be balanced with the right of the families to dignity, shelter and livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution.

“Demolition, being an extreme and irreversible measure, cannot be carried out without a policy that reconciles the right to shelter, livelihood and dignity,” the court recorded the submissions of the petitioner in its order.

The laws surrounding demolition of unauthorised structures lack even an iota of “human rights jurisprudence”, the counsel for the NGO said. The Bench took note, in its order, that States allow unauthorised constructions to survive undisturbed for decades.

“The conduct of States can even be interpreted as an ‘implied regularisation’ of long-standing unauthorised constructions by charging municipality tax for 30 to 40 years, providing electricity and water connections and converting properties into free holds… Then, suddenly, these structures are declared as illegal. They are demolished without even prior notice or providing alternative accommodation to the families… The state’s power to demolish cannot be exercised in a hurried, erratic and unsystematic manner,” the NGO counsel argued.

The petition had urged the apex court to constitute an expert committee to formulate a uniform policy that reconciled demolition and rehabilitation. “Women and children are thrown into the streets. Shelter is part of human dignity,” the counsel submitted.

Justice Joymalya Bagchi, on the Bench along Justice V. Mohana, said it was settled that a person cannot be dispossessed without following the due process of law. But the judge disagreed with the judiciary getting into the domain of policy-making.

“We cannot substitute the powers invested in a State to enforce rule of law with a court-empowered committee. We cannot fetter the state from taking a policy recourse. Once the state draws its policy, we can step in through judicial review if the policy is found to be arbitrary, unreasonable or not accommodating due process,” Justice Bagchi said.

The Bench disposed of the petition with a direction to the Union and State governments to consider the issues in it for formulation or revision of the demolition policy.

Published - August 12, 2026 06:57 pm IST