I haven't seen this pattern. But, I would expect it for a slightly different reason. The purpose is less "facilitating" queries than ensuring that the pair of keys remains unique throughout the entire set of transactions.
In other words, between dropping the primary key and creating the new key, there is a short window of opportunity for someone to insert a duplicate pair of keys. Then the second operation will fail. By creating the unique index first, you prevent this from happening.
If you know there are no other users/queries using the system when you are modifying the table (say you are in single user mode), then there is no need to create the additional index.