No Supreme Court Relief For Gurugram Builder Floors Amid Demolition Drive The Supreme Court of India has denied a request to halt the ongoing demolition drive in Gurugram, allowing the matter to be addressed urgently in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The decision comes amid a citywide anti-encroachment campaign targeting unauthorized constructions, particularly "stilt-plus-four" buildings, which are structures with four residential floors built atop stilt parking areas. The demolition drive, organized by the Haryana Shahari Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP), is set to cover 44 sectors of Gurugram starting today, as authorities continue their crackdown on unapproved developments. A senior lawyer representing residents, Gopal Sankaranarayanan, raised concerns during the Supreme Court hearing about the legality and safety of the demolition operations. He argued that the high court had previously ruled that the old policy regarding stilt-plus-four buildings should be followed, but authorities had now initiated large-scale demolitions without proper notice. Sankaranarayanan highlighted that the high court had not ordered the destruction of structures, yet the HSVP had begun street-by-street demolitions, cutting down trees and dismantling compound walls. He emphasized that children were exposed to the dangers of the demolition process, and no formal notice had been issued to affected residents. The Punjab and Haryana High Court had earlier issued an interim order in April 2026 to stay the implementation of the Haryana government’s "stilt-plus-four floors" policy, which allowed the construction of four residential floors above stilt parking.#gurugram #supreme_court_of_india #punjab_and_haryana_high_court #gopal_sankaranarayanan #haryana_shahari_vikas_pradhikaran
Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Against Gurugram Demolitions, Allows Petitioners To Approach HC Today Itself The Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider a petition challenging the ongoing demolition efforts in Gurugram, directing the petitioners to approach the Punjab and Haryana High Court immediately. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing the affected residents, orally submitted the matter before a bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi. The court instructed the petitioners to make an urgent mention before the High Court that day, requesting the Chief Justice of the High Court to address the issue at 1 PM or immediately after lunch. The petition contested the government's demolition drive, arguing that the action was being carried out without proper legal procedures. Sankaranarayanan claimed that authorities had initiated the demolitions by misinterpreting an interim order issued by the High Court, which had previously imposed a stay on the "Stilt + 4" (S+4) construction policy. He asserted that the structures in question were legal and that the High Court’s order did not authorize large-scale demolition. Chief Justice Kant questioned why the petitioners were seeking intervention from the Supreme Court, emphasizing that the High Court itself was the appropriate forum to address such issues. The petition, filed by residents of Sector 31 in Gurugram (Lane 635 to 957), challenged an interim order from the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated April 2, 2026. This order had imposed a state-wide stay on the S+4 policy, which allows for the construction of additional floors on existing buildings.#supreme_court #punjab_and_haryana_high_court #chief_judge_of_india #gopal_sankaranarayanan #sector_31_gurugram
High Court Rejects Punjab MP Amritpal’s Request for Temporary Release to Attend Parliament The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Friday rejected the plea of Amritpal Singh, a jailed Lok Sabha MP from Khadoor Sahib, seeking temporary release to attend the ongoing Budget Session of Parliament. The court emphasized that national security and public order take precedence over the personal and political rights of an elected representative, dismissing the petition as secondary to the state’s security concerns. Amritpal, currently detained in Assam’s Dibrugarh central jail under a preventive detention order issued by Punjab’s Department of Home Affairs, had sought temporary release to participate in the second phase of Parliament’s budget session, which began on 9 March and is set to conclude on 2 April. The 33-year-old self-styled preacher and open supporter of Khalistan argued that his presence in the session was critical to address issues affecting his constituency, including the aftermath of the August 2025 floods and the prevalence of drug abuse in Punjab. The court’s 11-page judgment, authored by a bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sanjiv Berry, stated that the right to liberty of an individual is “rendered subservient and inconsequential” when it conflicts with the maintenance of public order and state security. The judges reiterated that the sovereignty, integrity, and security of the state and nation are always paramount. Amritpal’s legal team, represented by senior advocates R.S. Bains, Imaan S. Khara, and Anmol Singh, contended that his continued detention was politically motivated and aimed at silencing his voice as an elected representative.#punjab_and_haryana_high_court #amritpal_singh #khadoor_sahib #dibrugarh_central_jail #punjab_department_of_home_affairs
HC raps HSSC for opaque department allocation process The Punjab and Haryana High Court has criticized the Haryana Staff Selection Commission (HSSC) for its "opaque and arbitrary" method of allocating government departments to selected candidates. In a detailed ruling, Justice Harpreet Singh Brar stated that the commission’s practice of prioritizing candidates based on the number of preferences they listed, rather than their merit rankings, violated constitutional principles of equality and fairness. The court emphasized that the current system constitutes a clear case of misconduct and directed the Haryana chief secretary to investigate the conduct of HSSC members and office-bearers. The court highlighted that the HSSC adopted a resolution in October 2019, which gave preference to candidates who submitted three or fewer preferences. However, this criterion was never disclosed to applicants, depriving them of the opportunity to make informed choices. The court noted that the concealment of such a critical factor undermines transparency and fairness in the recruitment process. It further ordered the chief secretaries of Haryana and Punjab to issue clear instructions ensuring that future department allocations follow lawful, comprehensive, and rational criteria to maintain transparency and integrity in public employment. The ruling underscores the importance of accountability in administrative processes and aims to prevent similar issues in the future. The court’s directive to review the conduct of HSSC officials reflects its commitment to upholding constitutional values and ensuring equitable treatment for all candidates.#haryana #haryana_staff_selection_commission #punjab_and_haryana_high_court #justice_harpreet_singh_brar #haryana_chief_secretary
