5 min readBhopalUpdated: Sep 11, 2026 02:30 AM IST
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed two petitions challenging the Ujjain Municipal Corporation’s decision to demolish portions of a mosque to widen a key road ahead of the Simhastha Kumbh 2028, holding that the action was taken in accordance with law and in the larger public interest of managing the movement and safety of crores of devotees expected to visit the temple town.
Why this mattersWith Ujjain preparing for Simhastha 2028, the court has held that the religious character of a structure does not by itself insulate it from lawful development action, particularly where authorities demonstrate a larger public-safety and traffic-management need and follow due process
Justice Sandeep N Bhatt on Wednesday rejected the petitioners’ contention that the action violated their constitutional rights under Articles 14, 25 and 26, observing that the corporation could not be said to be acting arbitrarily merely because the property was a religious place.
The court also noted that portions of 10 temples and one mosque had already been removed along the same road and that authorities in Ujjain had taken action against constructions involving around 80 religious places.
“Therefore, it cannot be said that the respondent Corporation is acting in an arbitrary manner or in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India,” the court held.
The High Court accepted the Corporation’s position that the action could not be characterised as discriminatory or unconstitutional. “It is a hard reality that with the efflux of time, the population of the city has increased,” Justice Bhatt observed.
“There is no dispute that the property in question is a religious place and has existed for many years,” the court recorded.
The court also took note of the petitioners’ continued objections to the widening process, observing that they appeared to be raising “one or another dispute under the pretext of giving special treatment to the religious place” and on the belief that differential treatment was being given to them.
Story continues below this ad
“Based on the above-mentioned discussion, such contentions are found to be incorrect,” the court said.
Finding that the statutory procedure had been followed and that the petitioners’ objections had been considered before the impugned order was passed, the court concluded that “no interference is called for.”
The court found that the Corporation had “already taken all necessary actions available under the law while strictly observing the principles of natural justice” and consequently held that the action of the Corporation and the State could not be regarded as “arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional, or violative of Articles 14, 25, 26, and 300A of the Constitution of India.”
“Consequently, no case is made out for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,” the court said.
Story continues below this ad
‘No differential treatment’
The court also rejected the petitioners’ claim that they were being subjected to differential treatment because the structure was a religious place.
The court held that in view of the Ujjain Development Plan, 2035, the Corporation was empowered to take action, provided the necessary statutory procedure was followed.
A major factor in the court’s decision was the scale of the upcoming Simhastha Kumbh 2028 and the location of the disputed structure.
The court observed that “the expectations of crores of devotees are required to be kept in mind,” along with the need to provide better facilities and manage traffic during the massive religious gathering.
Story continues below this ad
The petitions were filed by two different sets of persons claiming an interest in the mosque and administering its affairs. The mosque is registered as a Waqf property. The petitioners challenged notices issued by the Municipal Corporation proposing removal of portions of the structure to facilitate 15-metre road widening.
The proposed action affects a portion of the mosque’s prayer hall (Jamat Khana), a 120-foot-high minaret and the Mazhar Chouk Shahi, according to the petitioners. They argued that the structure was an ancient religious site that had existed for generations and that its partial demolition would infringe their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 25 and 26 of the Constitution.
‘Expecting crores of visitors during Kumbh’
The Corporation, however, told the court that the road widening was part of the Ujjain Development Plan, 2035, under which a 15-metre-wide road was to be developed from Kanthal Chouraha to Gopal Mandir.
The authorities told the court that during major religious events, lakhs of devotees use this route, while the city is expected to receive crores of visitors during Simhastha 2028. Road widening, according to the corporation, was therefore necessary to ensure smooth traffic movement and prevent congestion during the Shahi Sawari, Peshwai and Simhastha.
Story continues below this ad
The corporation further submitted that on the approximately 1.5-km stretch, almost all structures obstructing the proposed widening had already been removed, with the exception of the mosque in question and a structure directly opposite it.
