'You've Money For Ladli Behna, All Money On Freebies; Take Little Bit To Pay Compensation ': Supreme Court Pulls Up Maharashtra

“Do not take the Court for granted. You cannot treat every order of the Court in a casual manner. You have enough of money for Ladli bean (scheme). I read today's newspaper…all the money on freebies, you should take little bit for compensating the loss of land.,” said Justice Gavai.

The Bench of Justices BR Gavai, Sandeep Mehta and KV Viswanathan was hearing the TN Godavarman case, an omnibus forest protection matter. The present application was filed by a litigant claiming that his predecessors-in-interest purchased a 24-acre land in Pune in the 1950s. When the state government occupied that land, they instituted a suit and won all the way upto the Supreme Court. Subsequently, the decree was sought to be executed, but the state made a statement that the land had been given to a Defense Institute. The Defense Institute, on its part, claimed that it was not a party to the dispute and therefore could not be evicted.

Thereafter, the applicant moved to the Bombay High Court, praying that he would be allotted alternate land. The High Court issued strictures against the state for not allotting alternate land for 10 years. As such, in 2004, an alternate land was finally allotted. Eventually, the Central Empowered Committee informed the applicant that the said land was part of a notified forest area.

Previously, the Court had rebuked the State for this and had stated that the State's act impinged upon a private citizen's land. The Court the same as illegal and said that the State should have exercised due precaution.

In view of this, the Court had asked the State to file an affidavit regarding the following points:

1. As to whether another piece of equivalent land will be offered to the petitioner(s)/applicant(s); or
2. As to whether adequate compensation would be paid to the petitioner(s)/applicant(s);
3. As to whether the State Government proposes to move the Central Government for denotification of the said land as forest land.

However, given that the affidavit was not filed today also, the Court made it clear that if the same is not filed on or before the next date of hearing, the chief secretary will be personally present.

The Court also dismissed the State counsel's contention that since the order was uploaded on July 30, the State did not have sufficient time to act in accordance with the order. The Court found this excuse to be without substance. It added that the order was dictated in the presence of all parties.

Case Title: IN RE : T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 202/1995