The Supreme Court has dismissed a petition challenging the demolition of the Takiya Masjid in Ujjain, which was removed to facilitate the expansion of a parking area near the Mahakal Temple. The apex court made it clear that the petitioner did not have ownership rights over the land and therefore could not challenge the acquisition process.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta rejected the plea filed by a person claiming to represent the Takiya Masjid. Senior advocate Huzaifa Ahmadi, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the earlier dismissal of the case was based on the incorrect assumption that the land acquisition proceedings had attained finality.
The court, however, observed that the petitioner was merely an occupant and not the owner of the land. It held that rights related to land acquisition, including the requirement of a Social Impact Assessment (SIA), are available only to landowners and not to occupants.
Ahmadi contended that Section 64 of the Land Acquisition Act deals only with compensation and that the mandatory Social Impact Assessment under Sections 4 to 8 of the Act was not conducted before acquiring the land. The bench clarified that the present petition did not directly challenge the acquisition proceedings but only questioned the compensation award, which cannot reopen the acquisition process.
The court also noted that the land acquisition had already been completed and compensation paid. It recalled that the petitioners had earlier withdrawn their plea challenging the acquisition. During the hearing, Justice Vikram Nath remarked that it was “too late now” and nothing further could be done.
The Takiya Masjid, said to be around 200 years old, stood on land acquired by the Madhya Pradesh government for parking expansion and was demolished in January this year. The petitioners, including Mohammad Tayyab and 12 others, claimed that the mosque had been Waqf property since 1985 and that they had been offering prayers there. They had sought directions to rebuild the mosque and demanded an inquiry against the Ujjain District Collector and the Land Acquisition Officer.
