Bombay High Court Bars Eviction Notices For Weekends, Says Human Beings Are Not Pieces Of Chess Board Who Can Be Moved Around
In a significant order the Bombay High Court has asked statutory authorities to ensure they don't serve eviction notices expiring on weekends so that affected can approach the competent authority or High Court for relief as the case may be.“These are human beings. They have families. They are not pieces on some chess board that can be moved around or even swept of the board. The last thing...
In a significant order the Bombay High Court has asked statutory authorities to ensure they don't serve eviction notices expiring on weekends so that affected can approach the competent authority or High Court for relief as the case may be.
“These are human beings. They have families. They are not pieces on some chess board that can be moved around or even swept of the board. The last thing we want to hear is that once money is flung at these persons their concerns and their very humanity are immaterial.”
A division bench comprising Justices GS Patel and Kamal Khatta passed the order in urgent petitions moved by former slum dwellers who were asked to vacate their accommodations of 20 years in just seven days.
A High Court bench was specially constituted to hear the occupants on Saturday as the Slum Rehabilitation Authority's Apex Grievance Redressal Committee was unavailable.
“We now propose to take the liberty of issuing a direction applicable to all authorities everywhere that no notices for eviction are to be given mentioning only hours. A specific date must be mentioned and that date cannot be over a weekend when Courts are unavailable to the affected persons.”
"Justice under our Constitution must mean the right to expect fair treatment from an administrative authority; and, if not, the right to approach a court for redressal. Justice cannot be an empty promise," the court added.
The court was dealing with two writ petitions by the residents of Abdul Gafar Khan Road, Worli. They were originally slum dwellers but were rehabilitated in 2002/2006 and told these were permanent alternate accommodations.
Then suddenly in February 2024, they were abruptly handed over notices under Sections 33 & 38 of the Slum Act and asked to vacate premises. The developer Sattdhar Construction Pvt Ltd got the letter of intent amended to treat their buildings as transit camps.
The tenants were offered transit rent of Rs. 19,500 per month. A couple of the petitioners who didn't accept the offer were forced to approach HC on a weekend owing to the unavailability of the AGRC.
While the court ordered status quo on Saturday, certain occupants who hadn't approached the High Court were evicted from their homes.
On Wednesday when the matter was finally heard the court was livid at the manner in which the residents were evicted and the AGRC's indifference towards them. “If the High Court can assemble at short notice to hear a matter like this, we demand an explanation as to how the AGRC can say it is unavailable.”
The court directed the AGRC to assemble and hear the occupants on merits the very same day failing which the bench assured the AGRC that it would proceed against every member of AGRC. “If there is non-compliance, we will not hesitate to use powers including those in contempt against these serving bureaucrats.”
The court wondered how the SRA, meant to look after the welfare of slum dwellers could suddenly permit the uprooting of families after 18-20 years.
As for the developer, the court directed him to ensure that alternative rental premises are available in the vicinity. “It is an upsetting day for the High Court when we find it necessary to remind statutory authorities, including the SRA and the Apex Grievance Redressal Committee AGRC, that if the Slum Act is a welfare legislation, the welfare is not that of builders.”
After recording compliances, the matter wad disposed of yesterday.
Appearances – Advs Vidryan S Daware, Akhil Kupade & Prerna Pagare, for the Petitioners Adv Archana Gaikwad also for the petitioners.
Adv Yogesh Patili and Dhruti Kapadia for SRA
Adv Mayur Khandeparkar & Rahul Arora for the developer.
Adv Aparna Vhatkar, for AGRC & Adv Gaurangi Patil, AGP, for the State
Case No - WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 5671 OF 2024
Case Title - Jijaba Dashrath Shinde vs The State of Maharashtra