Supreme Court Asks Ministry Of Housing & Urban Affairs If It Has Any Rehabilitation Policy For Slum Dwellers Near Rail Tracks

The Supreme Court today asked the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs to place its stand as to whether it has any policy in slums adjacent to Railway Tracks in Gujarat and Haryana.

While issuing notice to the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs , the bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and CT Ravikumar in the SLP's assailing Gujarat and Punjab and Haryana High Court(s) demolition order, in their order said,

"Issue notice to Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs. ASG KM Nataraj waives notice. Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs to place on record whether it has any policy in place in respect of railway properties referred to in these proceedings in Gujarat and Haryana. List this matter on Friday."

On August 24, the Apex Court had directed the State of Gujarat to maintain status quo with regards to demolition of 10000 jhuggis in the State. The order for maintenance of status quo was passed by the division bench of Chief Justice NV Ramana and Justice Surya Kant.

The Top Court on November 25, 2021 had pulled the Ministry of Railway for taking contradictory stands before different forums including the Top Court with regards to the Rehabilitation Policy for evicted slum dwellers.

Courtroom Exchange

When the matter was called for hearing, Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj while taking the bench through the contents of the affidavit submitted that the Railways does not have any policy regarding rehabilitation of encroachers.

It was also his contention that the stand of Railways has always been consistent across all litigations and that there had been no variance in the stand of Railways.

"In terms of Railways Act, the Railway's stand is that the encroachers are liable to be removed without relief and rehabilitation. The Ministry of Railways cannot contribute towards any cost of rehabilitation. Housing being a state subject, the State Government may provide alternative settlement/rehabilitation if permitted under the applicable law," the affidavit submitted by Railways before the Top Court stated.

ASG further referred to para 137 and 138 of the Delhi High Court's judgement in Ajay Maken v Union of India 2019 SCC Online Del 7618 and submitted that the stand which was taken before the Delhi High Court was consistent with the stand taken before other High Courts and Top Court.

ASG drew Court's attention to the directions issued by the Top Court on August 31, 2020 in WP(C) No 13029/1985 after predominant presence of Jhuggis in Delhi along with 140 km route length of track in NCT was brought to Court's notice.

As per the order, directions were issued to the stakeholders to make and execute a comprehensive plan for removal of jhuggis in a phased manner.

To show compliance of the August 31, 2020's order ASG submitted that the Top Court's order did not make rehabilitation of encroachers obligatory before removal of encroachments but all possible opinions were being explored with the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and the Government of GNCTD without any financial burden on Railways.

The bench at this juncture asked as to whether the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs have any role with regards to the rehabilitation of encroachers for Gujarat and Haryana too?

"Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs has agreed that policy be extended to railway property. What is wrong with that? This position has not been challenged anywhere. Does the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs have any rule to play with regards to the property in Gujarat & Haryana. The Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs should take the responsibility of extending the similar scheme there. That's what we are putting to you. If they have no jurisdiction, then we understand. Whether the Ministry of Urban Development has any role at all and do they have any scheme for Gujarat and Haryana?," bench said.

ASG at this juncture sought time to seek instructions.

The bench thereafter while issuing notice to the Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development to explain as to whether they have any policy with regards to the properties in the proceedings adjourned the matter for Friday.

Case Title: Utran Se Besthan Railway Jhopadpatti Vikas Mandal V. Government Of India & Ors| Diary Number 19714/2021 & Deepak Sharma v Union of India| Diary No(s) 23559/2021

Click Here To Read/Download Order