The court said the state should carry out a survey or demarcation to ascertain whether there was any encroachment on the existing road with reference to existing records or maps.

He said if any encroachment is found, the state should issue appropriate written notice to the encroachers to remove the encroachment.

“In case the addressee raises any objection regarding the correctness or validity of the notice, he shall dispose of the objection by a speaking order in compliance with the principles of natural justice,” the bench said.

It specifies that if the objection is overruled, the State must provide reasonable notice to the person against whom adverse action has been proposed and, in the event of inaction by the person concerned, proceed in accordance with law to remove the objection. encroachment, unless prevented by an order of the competent authority. authority or court.

“If the existing width of the road, including state land adjacent to the road, is not sufficient to accommodate the widening of the road, steps shall be taken by the State to acquire the land in accordance with law before undertaking the road widening exercise”, it is specified. said.

The court said the Registrar (Judicial) of the apex court will circulate a copy of its judgment to the Chief Secretaries of all States and Union Territories to ensure compliance with the directions issued regarding the procedure to be followed for the purpose of the road traffic. enlargement in general.

“The Chief Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh has been ordered to conduct an inquiry into the entire matter relating to the illegal demolition, against all concerned state officials and contractors responsible for the illegal demolition” , he indicated.

While hearing the case on November 6, the top court had pulled up the Uttar Pradesh government for “illegal” demolition.

“You can’t come with bulldozers and demolish the buildings overnight. You don’t give the family time to leave. What about the household items inside the house?” the bench had told this orally to the lawyer representing the state government.