BRILLIANT: The Supreme Court stayed the Uttarakhand High Court's order to evict Haldwani; declares that "50,000 people cannot be uprooted in seven days."
On Thursday, the Supreme Court overturned an order from the Uttarakhand High Court to evict people from the region of Haldwani claimed by the railway. Under the order, authorities have issued eviction notices to more than 4,000 families who claim to have lived in the area for years and have valid government-approved documents.
Judge Sanjay Kishan Kaul and A tribunal composed of Abhay were issued. S order. The court has asked the state and railroads to find a "practical solution" and has postponed the issue until February 7, 2023.
The bank was particularly concerned that many of the people living there have claimed tenure and auction rights over the decades. There are two sides to the problem. First, force the lease. Second, they claim the land was auctioned after people fled after 1947. Many people stayed there. Rehabilitation should be done. There is a shop there. How can you promise to kick her out in seven days?" asked Judge SK Kaul.
Judge Oka said, "People say it's been there for 50 years."
“What worries us is how we are dealing with the situation of people who buy land at auction. Even so, residents have lived there for 50 to 60 years."There is a human side," the judge added.
Judge Oka pointed out that the high court made its decision without consulting the parties. Decide on a solution. "This is a human problem," he explained.
Justice Kaul added to Justice Oka's statement: Chances are no one can paint them all with the same brush. There may be different groups. However, each case should be considered individually. The documents should be checked by someone else. ”
Judge Oka questioned the High Court's order, stating, "It may not be accurate to say paramilitary force must be used to eliminate people who have lived there for decades." rice field.
At the hearing, the commission asked whether a demarcation line had been drawn between state land and railroad land. The Chamber of Commerce also asked if any real estate law proceedings were still underway.
India's additional Attorney General, Aishwarya Bhat, claimed that the land belonged to the railway and that the state and the railway were on the same side. She also said the Public Facilities Act was used to issue a series of eviction orders, petitioners represented by her Prashant Bhushan, an attorney, said these were unilateral orders issued during his Covid era. claimed to be. ASG Bhati also said the petitioner said he owned the land and was not seeking reclamation.
Colin Gonsalves, a senior advocate representing some of the doctoral petitioners, said the petitioners' families owned the land before independence and had leases signed in favour of the government. Attorney Siddharth Rusla also said many petitioners had signed state leases in their favour. A number of properties were on "Nazr" land, according to senior attorney Salman Khurshid.
"Uttarakhand must find a practical solution," Justice Kaur told the state after taking note of these submissions.
ASG Bhati emphasized the importance of the state in developing railway facilities. She highlighted Haldwani's function as a gateway for rail transport in Uttarakhand.
After the hearing, the Chamber of Commerce issued the following resolution:
"A council of scholars was presented to us. The need for railways was emphasized by her ASG. The question of whether the state government claims part of the land or whether the whole land belongs to the railroad is irrelevant. Other issues relate to a resident's claim to the land as a tenant or auctioneer. With 50,000 people unable to move in seven days, we are on track to issue orders. Like existing rehabilitation plans that take into account the needs of the railroad, whether they have rights or not, we need a workable system to separate those who have rights from those who do not.
We informed his ASG that residents of the area are in need of complete rehabilitation. The disputed decision instructions are valid for the time being. The court also clarified that it can proceed with proceedings under the Public Facilities Act. Further development or development of the property is also subject to restrictions. Jatinder Kumar Sethi, Deputy Attorney General of Uttarakhand, accepted the notification on behalf of the state government. The allegations filed in the petition focus on the fact that the petitioners are poor people who have been living legally for over 70 years in Mohala Nai Basti, Haldwani district. The plaintiff alleges that the Uttarakhand High Court ordered the eviction of more than 20,000 of her people living in more than 4,000 homes.
