Madhya Pradesh High Court temporarily stays demolition of Al-Falah University founder’s ancestral home

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has temporarily stayed a Mhow Cantonment Board decision to demolish the ancestral property of Al-Falah University founder Jawad Ahmed Siddiqui in Indore [Abdul Majid versus Union of India and Others]..Justice Pranay Verma directed that the petitioner Abdul Majid, who is currently in possession of the house, should respond to the demolition notice issued by the Cantonment Board, along with all relevant documents, within 15 days.The Court further directed after his reply is filed, he shall be provided a due opportunity of hearing before the authorities pass a speaking order in the matter. “Till the said exercise is completed and for a period of ten days thereafter in case the order is against the petitioner, no coercive action shall be taken against him,” the Court ordered on November 20..Al-Falah University has come under heightened scrutiny after medical professionals working there were arrested in connection with the recent Delhi car bomb blast case and recovery of a huge quantity of explosive substances. Siddiqui is currently in Enforcement Directorate (ED) custody in a money laundering case connected to the functioning of the university. On November 19, the Mwoh Cantonment Board issued a notice for demolition of the property that originally belonged to Siddiqui’s father. It was alleged that the building’s certain portions were constructed without any authorization. .During the hearing of the case on Thursday, the Court was told that the Cantonment Board had given only three days' time to the petitioner for removal of the construction, in violation of the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court. It was submitted that straightaway an order of removal was passed without affording of an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. .The Court noted that similar notices had earlier been issued to the petitioner in 1996–97, and that a fresh notice has now been issued.“If any action was to be taken against the petitioner after a period of almost 30 years from the date of issuance of previous notice, he ought to have been afforded an opportunity of hearing,” the Court said, as it granted interim relief to the petitioner. The petition was disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits..Senior Advocate Ajay Bagadia with Advocate Shri Rizwan Khan appeared for the petitioner.Advocate Ashutosh Nimgaonkar appeared for the respondents.[Read Order].Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.