India Tomorrow
NEW DELHI—The Supreme Court on Thursday stayed the Uttarakhand High Court order about the removal of over 4,000 families from a portion of land claimed by the Railway authorities.
The high court had directed the state government to ensure the removal of the families by January 8 even if the government had to requisition the services of the para-military forces. More than 95 percent of the families are Muslims.
Meanwhile, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH) and several other human rights organizations have welcomed the Supreme Corder. JIH said that the apex court order will restore the trust of people in judiciary.
A fact-finding team of the JIH comprising its national affairs secretary Malik Moatasim Khan, APCR secretary Nadik Khan, Laeeq Khan and Inamurrahman Khan had visited the affected families in Haldwani.
A team of journalists from Delhi, including India Tomorrow’s Masihuzzama Ansari, had also visited Haldwani and given a detailed report about the issue.
The issue also hit international headlines, with Aljazeera and many other international media having given coverage to the eviction issue.
The stay order was issued by a bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S Oka.
The bench issued notices to the State government and the Railways which are returnable on February 7, 2023.
The Supreme Court felt concerned about the fact that many of the occupants were living there for decades and some of them had taken the land on lease and purchased it in an auction sale.
The bench pointed out that the high court passed the order without hearing the parties. The apex court directed the state government and the Railways to find out a solution because it is a human issue.
The top court said that 50,000 people could not be removed within a matter of seven days. It observed that even if the railways wanted to acquire and utilize the land, some rehabilitation schemes must have been chalked out because the people affected lived there for 50-60 years.
What is the whole matter?
The matter of encroachment on the railway land was pending in court for many years.
A bridge was built on the Gola river which collapsed. In 2014, Ravishankar Joshi filed a petition in the High Court seeking to know the reason for the collapse.
The High Court formed a committee. After visiting the area, the committee reported that the people living on the banks of the Gola river are illegal occupants. The committee said these people have been resorting to digging which led to the bridge collapse.
Later, the court summoned the Railways. Railways told the court that they own 59 acres of land. Earlier responding to PIL, Railways had said they own only 29 acres of land. Till now, the Railways has not been able to officially decide how much land it actually owns.
People approached the Supreme Court and prayed for revisiting the order issued under the PP Act (Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971). The Supreme Court also said that under this act, the encroacher should be given a notice first.
A large number of notices were given to such people who had died 10 years ago. According to the order, the notice has to be given to a particular person who is living illegally.
According to Advocate Mohammad Yusuf, the PP Act says that before giving the notice, the officer needs to ascertain the ownership of the land.
Legal experts said that the notices issued are illegal.
According to Advocate Mohammad Yusuf, the notice is illegal because nowhere it has been said that this land belongs to the Railways.
“Without any evidence, it has been said that the land belongs to the Railways. When the action started, people filed objections but the Covid broke out. During the pandemic, a general notice was issued that there would be no hearing in this matter. After the Covid, the decision was taken unilaterally,” he said.
Around 1100 appeals are pending in the court
In Ravi Shankar’s case, 1700 appeals were filed in the PP Act, in which about 1100 appeals are pending. The High Court gave the decision that runs into 160 pages. This case is still going on under the PP Act and it is yet to be decided how much land is legal.
In Haldwani, some land is recorded as enemy property. Some people bought those properties through auction-sale certificates. The central government issued them auction sale certificates. The local authority issued them pattas.
Dispute over ownership of land
The state government and the railways are running into a dispute over the ownership of the land. The state government has accepted in the court that there is a dispute.
In 2016, the state government submitted an affidavit saying that it has not yet been decided whether this land belongs to the railways or them. It has not been demarcated yet.
However, the state government has retracted its statement. In the 2016 affidavit, the state government said different things in court.
“If the land belongs to the state government, how can the central government claim it?” asked the advocate.
