Conditions In Slum Rehabilitation Scheme Can't Be Waived, Supreme Court Tells Evicted Slum-dwellers

While hearing the special leave petitions assailing Gujarat High Court(s) demolition order, the Supreme Court on Friday observed that if a requirement of a scheme is an essential requirement, the question of condoning that requirement does not arise.

Considering the problems faced by the desirous persons who were being denied opportunity to apply owing to insistence of authorities to comply with essential formalities which determine eligibility under PMAY, the bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and CT Ravikumar asked the persons to interact with the officials and find out the solution if any.

"Mr Gonsalves on instructions submits that some of the desirous persons are being denied opportunity to apply owing to insistence of autorites to comply with essential formalities which determine eligibility under PMAY. It is open to such persons to first interact with officials & find out solutions if any. If a requirement is an essential requirement, the question of condoning that requirement does not arise. Effective persons must ensure that all pre conditions on determining the eligibility under PMAY are complied with," the bench said in its order.

When the matter was called for hearing, Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves appearing for the petitioner submitted that after the Top Court's order passed on the last date, only a small problem persisted wherein the authorities were asking the applicants to submit Income Tax Certificates.

"That affidavit can be filed that they don't have the certificate. File that nominal form declaring no income & below taxable income. If that is the scheme it cannot be condoned in so far as that condition," Justice Khanwilkar remarked.

Emphasizing on fulfilling the requirement of the scheme, Justice Khanwilkar said,

"Requirement of that scheme, that has to be fulfilled. If the time aspect is to be considered, that can be done. If the scheme requires that even if you are not income tax payee & you don't have an account number, you will have to do it. The scheme is under the Central Scheme, is it not? Whatever conditions are stipulated in that scheme, you must follow & comply with that. Mr Gonsalves, we understand but there must be a way out. Don't expect us to pass some order condoning the scheme which has never been under challenge."

Responding to the remarks posed by the judge, Senior Advocate laid emphasis on another problem with regards to failure of the applicants to get the sign of Local Councillor. 

Justice AM Khanwilkar at this juncture said that it would not tamper with the scheme which is applicable throughout the country and again emphasized on the applicant's mandate to fulfill the requirements.

"Whatever requirements are there, you will have to complete that requirement. How can we condone other requirements? We will not tamper with the scheme applicable throughout the county. Whatever requirements are there, you have to fulfill that. Eligibility conditions are there we will not interfere until the scheme is challenged," remarked Justice Khanwilkar.

The bench at this juncture sought ASG KM Nataraj on the problems being posed by Senior Advocate with regards to the applicants.

"Whatever is provided in the scheme, I'll have to examine but whatever requirements are there, they will have to be fulfilled. It will be a pan India effect," ASG KM Nataraj said.

"That scheme is not challenged before us & if it's challenged, beneficiaries will be affected. Any interference would invite some kind of litigation," remarked Justice Khanwilkar.

The bench at this juncture also asked ASG status with regards to the Top Court's direction of removing the approximately 40,995 encroachments.

"Have you filed further status reports on the 2nd aspect? Even for Delhi matters, you need to expedite the steps. Number is very big in Delhi," the bench said.

ASG at this juncture prayed for further time to file further status reports regarding follow up steps taken by the department, to which the bench acceded.

"As regards the observations made in order dated 18.02.2022 ASG prays for further time to file further status reports regarding follow up steps taken by the department. List this matter on March 21, 2022," the bench said in its order.

With regards to the SLP's assailing Punjab and Haryana High Court's order of demolition, Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves submitted that the solatium amount which was directed by the Top Court had not been disbursed to the affected person.

"We have asked for A/C numbers for depositing the money," AAG Arun Bhardwaj for the State of Haryana submitted.

Accordingly the bench in their order said, "Mr Gonsalves submits on instructions that the ex gratia amount has not been disurbed to the affected person. Mr Bahrdwaj submits that the concerned persons have not furnished bank A/C numbers where amount can be transferred. Mr Gonsalves assures that the needful will be done till 21st March."

Case Title: Utran Se Besthan Railway Jhopadpatti Vikas Mandal V. Government Of India| D No. 19714/2021

Click Here To Read/Download Order