• The issue of Railway land encroachment in Haldwani going on since 2007. PIL filed in UKHC in 2013. Know legal proceedings in brief, other SC orders on encroachment/illegal construction. SC wants Rehabilitation Plan for encroachers.

In an earlier essay Decoding Haldwani Railway Land Encroachment SC is not quite consistent on issue I had given sequence of events since 2007, extracts from the Uttarakhand High Court order of Dec 22, arguments of illegal occupants and SC orders on encroachments in Gujarat, Faridabad and Navi Mumbai.

The respected Supreme Court (SC) order of July 2024 asked the Union of India and State government to tell the proposed site where uprooted families (illegal encroachers) can be rehabilitated.

The SC order of 24/7/2024 says, “It transpires during the course of hearing that approximately 30.040 hectares land, owned by the Railways/State, has been allegedly encroached upon. Further, 4365 houses are said to have been constructed at the site, where over 50,000 persons are living. In view of the fact that hundreds of families are living at the site for decades, we have impressed upon the Union of India and the State of Uttarakhand to undertake the following exercise without any delay: 

(i) In the first phase, to identify the strip of the land (the width and the length), which is required immediately for the purpose of shifting of the railway line or for construction of necessary infrastructure;

(ii) To identify the families, who are likely to be affected in the event of vacation from that land; and

(iii) The proposed site where such affected/uprooted families can be rehabilitated.”  Courtesy www.indiankanoon.org

Two questions. One what is background of matter i.e. going on since 2007, UKHC order? And has SC been so compassionate with other encroachers? 

Here are excerpts from earlier essay (retained the serial number)

1. Railways told the UHC that 4,365 homes are illegally occupying 78 acres of railway land. Area is commonly known as Gaffur Basti. App 50,000 people live meaning average people per home 11.45.

2. In 2007 the North Eastern Railway tried to remove encroachments. An attempt was made to clear 10 out of 29 acres but fresh encroachments took place over the years after.

6. In 2013 a PIL was filed in UHC saying 29 acres of railway land encroached. It claimed that encroachment was hampering the extension of railway facilities including new trains to Haldwani and Kathgodam junctions.

7. The matter was under judicial scrutiny for a long time, “The Division Bench of this Court on 1st September, 2014, had passed an order directing to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to inspect the site and to submit the report of inspection, regarding the alleged aspect of illegal mining activities and illegal encroachments over State and Railway land.” Para 62 of 1

8. In 2016 Uttarakhand High Court asked authorities to remove encroachment within ten weeks. Para 62 of 1

14. According to Paras 72, 73 of 1 a joint survey was done and its report recorded by the UHC in its 7.4.2021 order.

Extracts, “The record shows a joint survey was conducted by the joint Team of Revenue Officials and the Official of the Railway Department and they have identified the unauthorised occupants, after demarcating the land which was found unauthorisedly occupied by them, and each and every unauthorised occupants, were duly heard by the said Joint Inspection Team, and the statement of as many as 1049 occupants, were recorded by the joint inspection team.” Also read para 176 of 1.

16. In May 22, the UHC directed affected people to present ownership docs in 2 weeks.

17. Seven months later, the UHC order of December 20, 2022 asked residents to vacate in one week.

2. Has SC before insisted upon a rehabilitation plan before uprooting people who illegally occupied land?

A. According to this June 2021 report in The Wire, “The Supreme Court Monday directed Haryana and the Faridabad municipal corporation to remove all encroachments, consisting around 10,000 residential constructions, in Aravali forest area near a village, saying land grabbers cannot take refuge of rule of law and talk of fairness.” Some 1 lakh people lived on encroached land in village Khori Gaon. 

B. In Gujarat, “The Apex Court, vide its order of 16th December, 2021, had laid down certain wider parameters and principles which were to be adhered for the purposes of taking an action against the encroachers in any property belonging to the State, Local Bodies or the railways.” Para 79 of 1

The guidelines classified time period for occupiers to vacate premises under two options and gave two and six weeks’ time failing which the Western Railways could demolish the structures. Para 80 of 1

C. Recently the SC ordered the demolition of illegal two multi-storeyed towers in NOIDA.  The demolition was done to give a message to builders that all illegal constructions would meet the same fate.

D. According to this October 2019 Hindustan Times report, “The demolition of a 15^th century shrine dedicated to Sant Ravidas (also Guru of Rajput Queen Meerabai) was carried out by the Delhi Development Authority on orders of the Supreme Court because shrine was located in a protected forest.

E. Subsequent to a Supreme Court order, the Bawakhaleshwar Temple in Navi Mumbai was demolished in 2018. Source Indian Express The temple, built over 32 acres, was built on land owned by MIDC (Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation).

Two common arguments made by Haldwani encroachers

1. The same order responds to claims of ownership of numerous occupants for e.g. Mr. Sarafat Khan claimed they are occupying the land which is in their possession for last over 50 years. “Merely being in an uninterrupted possession for last over 50 years, as claimed, that in itself, will not mature their legal rights to continue with possession.” Para 102 of 1

2. “While deciding the controversy over unauthorised occupancy whether there could be a deprivation of personal life or liberty, and in a given case, whether the procedure is resorted to for removal is unreasonable, fair and unjust. On the basis of the principle of Olga Tellis (Supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (Supra), has held that though one has a right to make use of public property for private purpose, but the said right of use is not permanent in nature. Para 236 of 1

Is the respected Supreme Court, by its latest order, rewarding encroachers? Is the Constitutional Court consistent in its orders towards illegal encroachers?

Read, reflect and decide. 

References

1. Uttarakhand High Court Order of December 20, 2022.

2.Decoding Haldwani Railway Land Encroachment SC is not quite consistent on issue

Also read

1. Why are Hindus protesting against Namaz in public grounds in Gurgaon?