Petitioner sought directions for rehabilitation of families displaced in 2000 railway hutment demolition. Respondent filed affidavit confirming rehabilitation of over 23,000 families. Court found no need for further directions and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE
P. I. L. NO.57 OF 2005
Changdeo Wankhede Vs. Shri Vilasrao Deshmukh & Ors.
...Petitioner.
...Respondents.
Mr. Amin H. Solkar for the Petitioner.
Mr. N. P. Deshpande, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent Nos.2 and 4. Mr. R. M. Sawant for Respondent No.3.
CORAM : DALVEER BHANDARI, C.J. & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.
October 18, 2005 .
P.C.
This petition has been filed by the President of Railway Zopadpatti Punarvasan Samiti, a registered body of the displaced slum dwellers. According to the Petitioner, on 28.2.2000, the Railway Ministry demolished the hutments based along the Harbour Railway Line who had settled there for more than a couple of decades, without any notice or prior intimation. The Petitioner further stated that about 22000 huts came to be demolished. The Petitioner prayed that the Respondents be directed to submit a report before this Court showing as to what steps have been taken for rehabilitating the families who were displaced in the demolition
2
which had taken place on 28.2.2000.
3
learned Counsel, no further directions are necessary and this petition is accordingly dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.
Changdeo Wankhede
Shri Vilasrao Deshmukh
Other Respondents
Dalveer Bhandari
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
