Mail News Service
Jamshedpur, Feb 9 : In the much-discussed case relating to illegal constructions and deviation from sanctioned building plans within the jurisdiction of the Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee (JNAC), the Jharkhand High Court has granted interim relief to one of the respondents.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar ordered maintenance of status quo and stayed demolition proceedings against the building of respondent No. 13, Kahkasha Nahid.
The court fixed March 9 as the next date of hearing in the matter. During the proceedings, counsel for respondent No. 13 submitted that she had not been given an adequate opportunity to present her case before the High Court earlier. Referring to orders passed by the Supreme Court in similar matters, it was argued that the apex court had directed maintenance of status quo for several respondents in cases involving alleged illegal constructions.
On this basis, a stay on demolition was sought.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the High Court directed that no coercive action be taken against the construction of respondent No. 13 for the time being and ordered status quo until further hearing.
Appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Rakesh Kumar Jha, advocate Niranjan Kumar referred to the High Court’s earlier orders dated January 14 and January 28, 2026, emphasizing that strict directions had already been issued for demolition of illegal structures and that these orders needed to be implemented effectively.
The case stems from the High Court’s January 14, 2026 order, passed on the basis of a report submitted by a three-member committee of advocates, directing JNAC to demolish illegal buildings. Subsequently, on January 28, the court dismissed applications filed by the respondents seeking relief. Both these orders were challenged before the Supreme Court by Rakesh Kumar Jha.
Earlier, while hearing a public interest litigation filed by Jha, the High Court had directed JNAC to demolish illegal constructions of all 24 respondents.
Applications seeking modification of the order and a stay on demolition were rejected, with the court observing that illegal constructions are unacceptable in any form—a view later endorsed by the Supreme Court.
It is noteworthy that several respondents have already approached the Supreme Court and some have obtained interim relief. The final outcome of the matter is now subject to further hearings before the apex court.
