Tenants Can't Resist Demolition Of Dilapidated Building, Protecting Life More Important Than Enforcing Tenancy Rights: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that protection from threat to life of tenant in a dilapidated building is more important than the tenancy rights of individuals under the U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021.
The bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Jayant Banerji held
“The tenants, however, will not be entitled to object to the expeditious demolition of the tenanted building, particularly when the authorities have inspected the said premises and found the requirement of its demolition as imperative. The applicable scheme under the Act, 1959 for protection of life of individuals on account of building being dilapidated and posing threat to life of individuals will have to be given primacy over the protection of tenancy rights of individual applicants.”
Petitioner approached the High Court seeking assistance of police force to demolish the building which he claimed to own. Petitioner pleaded that the building was nearly 100 years old and in dilapidated conditions. It was pleaded that maintenance and repair of the building was not possible.
It was pleaded in the writ petition that even Nagar Nigam, upon inspection, had found that the building required demolition. Though various proceedings had taken place, no action regarding demolition could take place due to resistance from the tenants of the building.
In his personal affidavit before the Court, the Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Aligarh submitted that there was apprehension regarding possible loss of life in the upcoming monsoon season as the building was in a very dilapidated state. It was pleaded that the Nagar Nigam was taking all possible steps towards demolition to protect and safeguard the lives of citizens.
The Court observed that under Sub-section (2) of Section 21 of the Tenancy Act, the landlord could make an application for eviction of tenants before the Rent Authority in case of repair or construction or rebuilding or addition or alteration or demolition of any part of the premises which could not be carried out without vacating the premises.
It observed that the rights of tenants under the Tenancy Act, need to be enforced subject to Section 331(1) of the U.P. Municipal Corporation Act, 1959 which provides that if it appears to the Municipal Commissioner that any structure (building wall, parapet, pavement, floor steps, railing, door or window frames or shutters or roof, or other structure and anything affixed to or projecting from or resting on, any building, wall, parapet or other structure) is in danger of falling or is dangerous for any person, he may order the owner or occupier to pull down, secure, remove or repair such structure to prevent danger.
Noting that the building was in dilapidated condition and needed to be pulled down, the Court observed that the disputed status of tenants could be gone in by the Rent Authority and refrained from commenting on it.
Holding that threat to life of the tenants was greater than their tenancy rights, the Court directed authorities of Nagar Nigam, Aligarh to demolish the dilapidated tenanted premises in accordance with law and giving reasonable opportunity to the tenants to remove their belongings.
“We expect the tenants occupying the premises in question to be alive to the concern of protection of life of individuals due to imminent collapse of the building and not to create any resistance/objection in demolition of the building,” observed the Court.
Case Title: Ashok Kumar Gupta v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others [WRIT - C No. - 6490 of 2025]