‘Encroachers can't claim right to occupy public land pending their rehabilitation': Delhi HC refuses relief to over 350 slum dwellers
'Encroachers cannot claim the right to continue occupying public land, pending the resolution of their rehabilitation claims under the applicable policy, as this would unduly impede public projects,' the Delhi High Court held last Friday (June 6) while deciding pleas by as many as 417 residents of Bhoomiheen Camp in Kalkaji.
The residents were seeking the HC's protection from demolition of their settlements as well as their rehabilitation.
Reasoning that the right to seek rehabilitation, as it is, is not an absolute constitutional entitlement 'available to encroachers such as themselves', Justice Dharmesh Sharma added that 'determination of eligibility for rehabilitation is a separate process from the removal of encroachers from public land.' Of the over 400-odd petitioners, the HC granted some relief to around 30 of them.
On June 2, minutes before petitions to stay demolition of homes at the slum in Southeast Delhi's Govindpuri were heard by a HC vacation bench, the civic authorities had already started razing down the hutments.
The petitioners had challenged orders by Justice Sharma, on May 26 and May 30, where he had rejected the dwellers' pleas for protection from demolition and their rehabilitation.
The petitioners had moved the court first in 2023, claiming that the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), in 'an arbitrary and illegal manner, proposed to demolish their jhuggi-jhopdis'.
The proposal, they contended, was contrary to the Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015, and surveys for their rehabilitation were conducted 'by an obscure, outsourced agency appointed by DDA'. It was also pointed out that due processes were not followed.
Justice Sharma, while closing a bunch of petitions moved by the 417 dwellers, ruled, '… it is evident that the interim injunctions obtained by the petitioners have not only hindered the timely execution of the rehabilitation project but have also resulted in a significant escalation of public expenditure, thereby causing financial strain on the State. Even assuming, arguendo, that the petitioners may have plausible grounds to assert a legal right to rehabilitation, a favourable adjudication would at best extend the scope of eligible beneficiaries under the prevailing rehabilitation policy. However, such a contention cannot translate into a right to indefinitely occupy public land or retain possession of their respective jhuggi jhopri dwellings, especially when the removal is in furtherance of a larger public interest and in accordance with due process.'
What the court ruled
-Among the 417 petitioners, for 165 who were occupying upper floors of the jhuggis, and those who approached the HC without exhausting the remedy of the appellate authority after their claim for rehabilitation was rejected by the Eligibility Determination Committee (EDC), the court dismissed their petitions.
Such petitioners can, however, approach the appellate authority within six weeks, the court directed. However, the court clarified, such remedies 'shall not stand in the way of the DDA proceeding with the demolition action.'
-The court also refused to grant any relief to a bunch of petitioners whose rehabilitation claims were rejected by the EDC as well as the Appellate Authority on the ground that they had failed to produce a valid and separate ration card in their individual names.
-Justice Sharma, however, allowed relief for 26 petitioner-dwellers, whose rehabilitation claims were allowed by the appellate authority but were subsequently rejected by DDA. The court directed the competent authority 'to review, reconsider or recall their impugned decisions rejecting the claims of the present set of petitioners within six weeks, as per the 2015 policy, and to proceed with their relocation and rehabilitation in accordance with law.'
-It dismissed pleas by 50 dwellers, where the appellate authority had rejected the claims on the ground that their names do not figure in the voter lists for the years 2012-2015, before the eligibility cut-off date, or on the ground that the voter card furnished by them was found to be invalid.
-The court also dismissed pleas by six dwellers who were seeking two allotments against one jhuggi despite one allotment already made against the claimed structure.
-In the case of one petitioner where the appellate authority allowed the claim but was not allotted an alternative dwelling unit, the HC directed DDA 'to proceed with the allotment of an alternative dwelling to the petitioner within six weeks, as per the 2015 Policy.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
33 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Streamline process of land acquisition and award of compensation using technology, Karnataka High Court directs Chief Secretary
The High Court of Karnataka has directed the State Chief Secretary to streamline, using information technology, the process of acquisition, award of compensation, redetermination of compensation, etc., all land acquisition cases. The Chief Secretary should also lay down some guidelines of standard operating procedure with the assistance of e-government department to bring about transparency and efficiency in the system relating to grant of compensation on account of acquisition of land and while doing so, protect the interest of the land-losers, who are rendered voiceless in the proceeding, the court said. The court also said that the information technology tool to be used for streamlining the process should be capable of capturing the details of the acquisition notification, inquiry, report of the Special Land Acquisition Officers (SLAOs), final notification, court proceedings, reference of award to the courts, and all related proceedings and documents from the time of issuance of a preliminary notification till the final notification, including notices, file notings, etc. Justice Suraj Govindaraj issued the directions while pointing out the delay in the process of redetermination of compensation based on the civil court's order with respect to certain land that was acquired in 1991 for the Upper Tunga Project in Haveri district and for Konkan Railway project in Karwar of Uttara Kannada district. The SLAO had passed order on redetermination only in 2022, the court noted. The technology should have tools for day-to-day follow-up of the proceedings before the reference court, and day-to-day actions, and the responsibility of the each of the persons for the proceeding before the reference court, and other proceedings in the acquisition process, the court said. Meanwhile, the court directed the Chief Secretary to institute an enquiry on the delay in redetermination process in this case and submit a report within six weeks.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
No comments on judge's impeachment as matter not before Parliament yet: LS Speaker Om Birla
Mumbai, Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla on Monday said the matter related to the impeachment of Justice Yashwant Varma is not before Parliament yet and there is no point commenting on the issue. No comments on judge's impeachment as matter not before Parliament yet: LS Speaker Om Birla "We can discuss the issue when it is brought before Parliament. There is no point talking about a matter that is not before the House," Birla told reporters on the sidelines of a conference here. The then Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna had written to the president and the prime minister to remove Justice Varma, who is mired in a cash-discovery row. Justice Khanna's report was based on the findings of a three-judge in-house panel that investigated the case. Justice Khanna had prodded Justice Varma to resign but the latter had refused. A motion for impeachment could be brought in either of the two Houses of Parliament. In the Rajya Sabha, at least 50 members have to sign the motion. In the Lok Sabha, 100 members have to support it. According to the Judges Act of 1968, once a motion to remove a judge is admitted in any of the Houses, the speaker or the chairman, as the case may be, will constitute a three-member committee to investigate the grounds on which the removal has been sought. The committee consists of the CJI or a Supreme Court judge, the chief justice of one of the 25 high courts and a "distinguished jurist". The monsoon session of Parliament is scheduled to begin from July 21 and conclude on August 12. A fire incident at Justice Varma's residence in the national capital in March, when he was a judge of the Delhi High Court, led to the discovery of several burnt sacks of cash at the outhouse. Though the judge claimed ignorance about the cash, the Supreme Court-appointed committee indicted him after speaking to a number of witnesses and recording his statement. The apex court has since transferred Justice Varma to his parent high court, the Allahabad High Court, where he has not been assigned any judicial work. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
News18
4 hours ago
- News18
Rajasthan's Sariska Tiger Reserve Under Threat As Mining Push Prompts Boundary Shift
Last Updated: The Rajasthan government's plan to alter Sariska Tiger Reserve's boundaries for mining leases has sparked outrage among conservationists, raising fears of ecological damage A controversial proposal by the Rajasthan government to alter the core boundaries of the Sariska Tiger Reserve has sparked outrage among wildlife conservationists and raised fears of a major ecological setback. At the heart of the controversy lies a plan to shrink parts of Sariska's Critical Tiger Habitat (CTH) while expanding it elsewhere. If implemented, this reshaping of Sariska's map could pave the way for the revival of over 50 mining leases previously barred under environmental restrictions. According to the official proposal currently under review, the government intends to exclude 48.39 square kilometres of land from the CTH, terming it 'eroded peripheral hills" that are already 'impacted by human activities". In exchange, it suggests adding 90.91 square kilometres from the buffer zone – areas considered of relatively lesser protection – arguing that this swap will create 'quality tiger habitat" and foster 'harmony" between forest authorities and local communities. 'This move is deeply unfortunate," said Sunayan Sharma, a retired Indian Forest Service officer and former Field Director of Sariska. We lost all our tigers in 2004 and spent years restoring the population. Today, with 48 tigers, including several cubs, we are seeing hope. Undermining this fragile recovery by opening up pathways for mining is akin to inviting disaster, Sharma added. Sharma was among the key figures in the massive relocation and rehabilitation efforts that brought tigers back to Sariska in 2008 after they were declared locally extinct. Critics argue that the land proposed for exclusion isn't merely degraded, it includes critical wildlife corridors. These narrow natural pathways allow tigers to move between different parts of the forest and are vital for their genetic diversity, territorial spread, and safety. Emotions also run high among local conservation activists. Sunil Mehta, president of the Sariska Tiger Foundation, said the proposal feels like a betrayal of years of hard-won progress. 'We fought to bring Sariska back to life. Tigers returned. The forest began to breathe again," Mehta said, visibly emotional, adding, 'Now, if mining resumes, what legacy are we leaving behind? That we chose industry over integrity, concrete over cubs?" According to Mehta and other experts, reintroducing mining in the area – even just outside the core boundary – will intensify noise, pollution, and human activity, directly threatening tiger habitats and the reserve's ecological balance. The state government maintains that the proposed boundary realignment is scientifically sound and socially balanced. Officials argue that the new areas being added to the CTH are of high ecological value, and that the shift will not compromise tiger conservation. However, many experts remain unconvinced. 'The claim that this is for better coordination with communities sounds more like a cover for economic interests," said a conservation policy analyst. 'We've seen such narratives before – conservation rebranded as compromise." The proposal is currently pending approval before the State Wildlife Board. If it clears that hurdle, it will be forwarded to the National Board for Wildlife for final review. If greenlit, over 50 mines, dormant due to environmental safeguards, could resume operations almost immediately. First Published: June 23, 2025, 16:29 IST
