Danger to human life overrides tenancy claims, says Allahabad High Court, orders tenant eviction and demolition of dilapidated building

The Allahabad High Court has ordered eviction of tenants from a building that’s in a really bad shape by stating that tenancy protection laws can’t jeopardize public safety. This decision came after part of the building collapsed in 2025 causing damage. Located in Varanasi, this building is set to be demolished following the high court order. However, the court clarified the tenants are free to approach the competent authority for seeking appropriate relief since they have to leave the property for the demolition to take place.

Additionally, the Allahabad High Court pointed out that tenants generally have the right to demand maintenance of the property in habitable condition. If the landlord neglects this, tenants can carry out necessary repairs and ask for reimbursement as per the law.

What was the tenant’s dispute about?

The building in Varanasi is in a highly dilapidated state and poses serious risk to passers-by as well as people living in the building and its neighborhood. Because of this, the Varanasi Nagar Nigam issued a notice on August 3, 2021 under Section 331(1)(2) of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1959, directing demolition of the unsafe structure within seven days.


Following this notice, the landlord submitted several representations before the concerned Magistrate. The Municipal Commissioner also sought a report from the Sigra police station, which submitted a detailed report on August 21, 2021 confirming that the building had become dilapidated and required demolition. But, still no effective action was taken. Consequently, on August 29, 2025, a portion of the building collapsed, disrupting traffic and posing serious threat to public safety.

The landlord’s lawyer vehemently argued before the Allahabad High Court that none of the tenants has obtained any stay against the demolition or dispossession from any competent court. The landlord’s lawyer also pinted out that no proceedings were initiated challenging the demolition notice dated August 3, 2021. The landlord’s lawyer argued that while the Uttar Pradesh Regulation of Tenancy Act, 2021 protects tenant rights, such protection cannot override the Section 331 of the Act of 1959 to pull down a structure that is found to be ruinous and dangerous to human life.

On February 20, 2026, the tenants lost the case.

The Allahabad High Court ordered the demolition of this dangerous property and directed the government to ensure that adequate police presence is available during the demolition process to ensure safety, security as well as maintenance of law and order. The high court also ruled that the authority may recover the costs incurred in demolition of the building from the landlord as per law.

Also read: Tenants constructed two extra floors in rented property without consent; landlord wins eviction case in high court due to this reason

Why did the tenants lose this case?

Rahul Sundaram, Partner, IndiaLaw LLP, said to ET Wealth Online: "Tenants lost because once the municipality declares a building dangerous under Section 331 of the 1959 Act, public safety overrides tenancy rights. The court held that tenants cannot use the Tenancy Act 2021 to block demolition merely because they have pending eviction suits.

Sundaram explains that this means is that tenants retain their right to claim compensation for premature termination of tenancy, or seek rehousing under Section 334(5) of the 1959 Act if the demolition notice is withdrawn. However, these remedies must be pursued after demolition, not used as grounds to delay the demolition.

Also read: Tenants sold property bought from landlord’s wife on the basis of a Will, son raised disputes against Will; Delhi HC stays property sale till final trial

Allahabad High Court analysis and discussion

Allahabad High Court gave this judgement on February 20, 2026.

Tenants are at liberty to approach the court for appropriate relief for eviction but demolition can’t be stopped

The high court said that they find that any tenant claiming protection under the Tenancy Act, 2021 is at liberty to approach the competent authority for appropriate relief, which may hereafter pass suitable orders in accordance with law. The right which is available to a tenant in respect of dilapidated building, however, will have to be enforced subject to the provisions of Section 331 of the Act, 1959 which deal with a special exigency where the tenanted building requires imminent demolition for protection of life of individuals.

UP Municipalities Act empowers Municipal Commissioner to order vacation of building where such structure is found to be in dangerous condition

The Allahabad High Court said that the Section 334 of the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1959 expressly empowers the Municipal Commissioner to order vacation of a building or any portion thereof where such structure is found to be in a ruinous or dangerous condition within the meaning of Section 331.

The Allahabad High Court said: “Upon issuance of such notice, every person in occupation is statutorily bound to vacate the premises, and continued occupation is prohibited unless the notice is withdrawn. The provision also authorises removal of occupants through police assistance in case of non-compliance.”

Continued occupation of dangerous building is contrary to Section 334(3)

The Allahabad High Court said that in the present case, once the building was officially declared dangerous and a demolition notice dated August 3, 2021 was issued, the occupants are under a legal obligation to vacate the premises.

The Allahabad High Court said: “Their (tenants) continued occupation, despite clear findings of structural danger and partial collapse of the building on 29.08.2025, is directly contrary to Section 334(3). The Municipal Commissioner is, therefore, fully empowered under Section 334(4) to seek police assistance for removal of occupants and to ensure execution of demolition.”

While sub-Section (5) preserves limited reinstatement rights upon withdrawal of notice, such provision has no application where demolition becomes inevitable due to safety concerns. Accordingly, the statutory scheme makes it abundantly clear that once a building is declared dangerous, individual occupancy rights stand subordinated to public safety, and obstruction to demolition cannot be legally sustained.

Also read: Tenant staying after lease expiry? When landlords can evict with just 15 days’ notice

Public safety overrides tenancy rights

The Allahabad High Court said that public safety overrides tenancy rights.

Allahabad High Court said: “A tenant’s right to occupy premises under the U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 cannot be invoked to compel continued residence in a structure declared dangerous, nor can such right be used to expose occupants or the public to risk of life.”

The Allahabad High Court said that once a building is found to be unfit for human habitation, municipal authorities are legally empowered to proceed with demolition, and tenants cannot obstruct such statutory action.

The Allahabad High Court said: “It is equally well recognised that landlords are entitled to seek eviction where premises become unsafe for occupation. Conversely, tenants possess the right to demand maintenance of the property in habitable condition, and in case of neglect, may undertake necessary repairs and seek reimbursement in accordance with law.”

The Allahabad High Court said that none of these private rights can prevail over statutory duties of the Nagar Nigam to remove dangerous structures. The high court also said that procedural fairness requires that occupants be afforded a reasonable opportunity to remove their personal belongings prior to demolition, unless emergent circumstances warrant immediate action.

The Allahabad High Court held that the rights of the tenants in such an exigency will have to be dealt with under the Tenancy Act, 2021.

The Allahabad High Court said: “The tenants, however, will not be entitled to object to the expeditious demolition of the tenanted building, particularly when the authorities have inspected the said premises and found the requirement of its demolition as imperative.”

The high court said that the applicable scheme under the Act, 1959 for protection of life of individuals on account of buildings being dilapidated and posing threat to life of individuals will have to be given primacy over the protection of tenancy rights of individual applicants.

Judgement:

• In view of the facts and circumstances, Allahabad High Court is satisfied that the building in question is in a ruinous condition and deserves to be demolished without waiting for the dispute with the tenants to be resolved.
• Whatever rights they may be having under the provisions of Tenancy Act will always be available to them and the same cannot be held to be a ground to further delay the demolition of the building in question.

Order:

• Accordingly, the Respondent No.3 is directed to demolish the building in question within two weeks from today duly notifying the date and time of demolition. Respondent No.4 is directed to ensure that necessary police force is provided during the time of demolition to ensure safety, security as well as maintenance of law and order.
• The respondent authority may recover the costs so incurred in demolition of the building from the petitioner (landlord) as per law. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the writ petition is allowed.