LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

ZULFIQUAR HAIDER & ANR. versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 5 S.C.R. 205 · Decided: 31-03-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY S. OKA · Disposal: Disposed off

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 5 S.C.R. 205 : 2025 INSC 480
Zulfiquar Haider & Anr. 
v. 
State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 4590 of 2025)
01 April 2025
[Abhay S. Oka* and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the demolition of the appellants’ residential premises/
buildings by the Prayagraj Development Authority (PDA) purportedly 
done under Section 27 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and 
Development Act, 1973 was illegal.
Headnotes†
Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 – 
ss.27, 43 – Order of demolition of building – Services of 
notices, etc. – Constitution of India – Art. 21 – Right to 
shelter – Residential structures of the appellants demolished 
purportedly u/s.27 – Whether the demolition was illegal: 
Held: Yes – Demolition action is illegal and arbitrary violating 
the appellants’ right to shelter guaranteed by Art. 21 – Before a 
structure is demolished it is the duty of the officers of the PDA 
that every possible effort be made to effect a proper service of 
the show-cause notice – Repeated efforts have to be made to 
effect personal service – Only if those efforts fail, can the other 
two options of affixing and of sending by registered post be 
resorted to – Considering the drastic consequences provided in 
s.27, recourse should usually be taken to both modes – Moreover, 
after proper and effective service of the order of demolition, at 
least 15 days’ time must be provided to the owner or occupier 
to avail the remedy of an Appeal u/s.27(2) – In present case, 
no efforts were made to make the personal service of the show 
cause notice or sending it by registered post – The same is the 
case with the demolition order dated 08.01.2021 – On the very 
day, it was stated to be served by affixing – A copy thereof was 
not sent by the registered post – Only the communication dated 
01.03.2021, was sent by the registered post, which was served 
upon the appellants on Saturday, 06.03.2021 – Within 24 hours 
* Author
206
[2025] 5 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
of the service of the said communication, the structures were 
brazenly demolished on a Sunday – This deprived the appellants 
of their opportunity to avail of the remedy of appeal under sub-
Section (2) of s.27– Residential structures of citizens cannot 
be demolished in such a summary manner without following 
the principles of natural justice – Impugned order of High Court 
set aside – Costs of Rs.10,00,000/- imposed on PDA to be 
paid in each appeal to the appellants with interest as directed. 
[Paras 9, 12-14, 17]
Words and Phrases – Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and 
Development Act, 1973 – s.43(1)(d)(ii) – “if such person cannot 
be found” – Interpretation:
Held: Clause (d) of sub-Section (1) of s.43 will apply in this case – 
It provides that if a person to whom the document is addressed is 
not found, it shall be affixed on some conspicuous part of his last 
known place of residence or business, or it should be tendered 
to some adult member of his family – There is also an option 
provided to send the document by registered post – Clause (d)
(ii) uses the words “if such person cannot be found” – The words 
are not “if such a person is not found” – It is clear that only after 
genuine multiple efforts are made to find the person on more 
than one day, one can say that “the person cannot be found” – It 
cannot be that the person entrusted with the job of serving notice 
goes to the address and affixes it after finding that on that day, 
the person concerned is unavailable at a given time. [Para 9]
Constitution of India – Art. 21 – Right to shelter – Violation 
of, direction to PDA:
Held: Right to shelter is an integral part of Art. 21 – This right can 
be taken away only by following due process of law – Moreover, 
our country is governed by the rule of law, which is an integral 
part of the basic structure of the Constitution – The residential 
structures of citizens cannot be demolished in a summary manner 
without following the principles of natural justice – This is a case 
of bulldozer justice – PDA to scrupulously follow the directions 
in the case of in Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of 
structures. [Paras 12, 14, 17]
List of Acts
Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973; 
Constitution of India.
[2025] 5 S.C.R. 
207
Zulfiquar Haider & Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
List of Keywords
Section 27 and 43 of Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development 
Act, 1973; Demolition of residential str

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.