Supreme Court Upholds Lucknow-Akbarnagar Demolition Drive, Prevents Eviction Of Dwellers Before Giving Alternative Accommodation
While upholding the demolition drive of the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) against unauthorized constructions in the Akbarnagar area of Lucknow city, the Supreme Court on Friday (May 10) clarified that no slum dweller should be evicted without being given alternative accommodation.The Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta upheld the Allahabad High Court's observations...
While upholding the demolition drive of the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) against unauthorized constructions in the Akbarnagar area of Lucknow city, the Supreme Court on Friday (May 10) clarified that no slum dweller should be evicted without being given alternative accommodation.
The Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta upheld the Allahabad High Court's observations and directions insofar as demolition and eviction action in the Lucknow-Akbarnagar floodplain area is concerned. It said,
"We are in agreement with the findings recorded by the High Court in the impugned judgment that the colony in question has been constructed in the floodplain area. It's an accepted and admitted position that the petitioners do not have any documents or title...infact their claim is based upon adverse possession, etc."
The observation relating to rehabilitation was made in view of a statement by Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj that 1818 applications for rehabilitation and allotment of alternative accommodation have been received. Out of the same, 1032 have been scrutinized and found to be eligible, whereas 706 applications are still under scrutiny.
Considering the ASG's submission, the court directed: "the applications must be scrutinized and all eligible persons must be offered alternative accommodation. The dwellers will not be removed without alternative accommodation being allotted to them. However, once alternative accommodation is allotted to the dwellers, they must hand over vacant possession to the Lucknow Development Authority. In case they fail to do, Lucknow Development Authority will be entitled to take action as per law."
Insofar as the quantum of amount payable by dwellers (for rehabilitation purposes), the court noted that Rs.4.79 lacs are to be paid over a period of 15 years, in terms of the High Court's directions.
When the petitioners pointed out that there are other floodplain areas in Lucknow in which there are unauthorized constructions, the court directed the LDA/State of Uttar Pradesh to undertake a survey and file details alongwith affidavit before the High Court within 3 months. "They shall draw up an action plan and remove unauthorized encroachment...", the bench observed.
Before parting, the bench clarified that the "date of allotment" shall mean the date on which physical possession of the alternative accommodation has been handed over to allottee.
Observations
During the hearing, the petitioners' lawyers assailed the High Court judgment saying that the alternative accommodation was far and they had been paying taxes to the state. However, the bench was not convinced and remarked that the petitioners were never granted ownership of the land by the state.
The bench also perused a 2014 report by Civil Engineering Department, IIT (Roorkee) pertaining to study of Gomti river front development. The said report described Kukrail nallah/river as a major nallah which joins Gomti river. Details of the maximum flood in the said nallah were also indicated. It further referred to a Sewage Treatment Plant which has been constructed.
Taking into account the above, the bench found itself in agreement with the High Court observations.
Advocates Prashant Bhushan, MR Shamshad etc. appeared for the petitioners.
Background
The LDA passed demolition orders with respect to Akbarnagar area, citing illegal construction on Kukrail's riverbed and banks. The Kukrail riverbed merges with River Gomti, which supplies drinking water to nearly entire Lucknow.
The LDA's case was that the slum dwellers, over a long period of time, unauthorizedly occupied banks of the Kukrail water channel. They raised disputed constructions and converted the riverbed into an urban open sewer. All the drains of the slum, containing its waste (such as fecal matter) was let loose in the Kukrail water channel, which flows to river Gomti.
Before the Allahabad High Court, the respondent-authorities submitted that since a large number of Lucknow residents' fundamental right to access to clean drinking water was involved, it was incumbent that the Kukrail water channel be kept clean. Thus, around 1158 constructions raised by the petitioners were required to be removed.
For the rehabilitation of the slum dwellers, the LDA came up with a rehabilitation policy under which all the BPL (below poverty line) persons were offered appropriate flats made for the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) on the production of their ration card or other appropriate documents, proving that they belong to BPL category.
Recently, as many as 78 houses were razed by the LDA to pave the way for the ambitious Kukrail riverfront development project as well as to clean the Kukrail riverbed.
Case Title: SHAKEEL AHMAD AND ORS. Versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS., SLP(C) No. 6531/2024 (and connected matters)
Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 398