Disposed

M/S Shiv Sai Welfare Society v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Bombay HC11 Aug 2015WP/249/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Writ Court refused interim relief to restrain eviction of petitioners squatting near railway tracks, citing safety concerns. The court directed the MMRDA to examine representations for permanent alternate accommodation under the World Bank R & R Policy for MUTP 2000 within 4 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Interim relief denied; MMRDA directed to examine representation for permanent alternate accommodation under World Bank policy within 4 weeks.

M/S Shiv Sai Welfare Society Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors. — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

WPL. 1187-15

¶2

VPH

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION (L) No. 1187 OF 2015

¶5

M/s. Shiv Sai Welfare Society ... Petitioners Vs. The Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents

¶6

¶7

Mr. Sachin V. Masurkar, for the Petitioners. Mr. Suresh Kumar, for Respondent No. 1. Ms. Uma Palsule-Desai, AGP for Respondent No. 2. Mr. Yogesh Ahirrao i/b Meena Kshirsagar, for Respondent No. 5.

¶8

¶9

CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & B. P. COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 11, 2015 PC.

¶10

By this petition which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Petitioners are seeking writ of mandamus directing Respondents not to demolish their structures or evict them without due process of law. Petitioners are further seeking direction to Respondent No. 5 to conduct survey of the property as per directives issued by the World Bank under Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy for Mumbai Urban Transport Project - 2000 (for short “R & R Policy for MUTP 2000”) and to decide the eligibility criteria of the

¶11

1 / 4

¶12

WPL. 1187-15

¶13

members of the Petitioner-Society on merits as per the said policy.

¶14

It is an admitted position that the Petitioners have constructed their hutments just within 2 fts. near the railway lines on the railway property. According to the Respondents, Petitioners were been evicted on 28^th May, 2015. This is, however, denied by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners. It is submitted that as per the policy framed by the World Bank and the MMRDA, the Petitioners are entitled to get alternate permanent accommodation. It is submitted that the Petitioners fall under category 5 of the said scheme.

¶15

It is submitted that so long as Petitioners are not rehabilitated as per the said policy, they should not be evicted and the Respondents may be restrained from constructing any wall or other structure thereby affecting the entry and exit of the members of the Petitioner Society of their existing structures. It is further submitted that they are residing there since 1995 and they have relevant documents to prove the said fact.

¶16

We have seen the photographs, shown by the learned counsel appearing for the Railway, which disclose that practically

¶17

2 / 4

¶18

WPL. 1187-15

¶19

these hutments are hardly couple of fts. away from the railway track. The Petitioners are, obviously, illegal squatters and therefore, have no right to continue to remain on the railway land, which is adjacent to the railway tack.

¶20

We are surprised by the fact that Petitioners were permitted to squat just 2 fts. away from the railway-line for number of years and neither MMRDA, nor the competent authorities including railway authority had taken any steps to remove these hutments. We read many news in the newspapers about stone throwing incidences by the people who stay next to the railway-line, which had resulted in death of the people who travel by train. Almost the entire city of Mumbai travels from north Mumbai to South Mumbai from morning by train and they return to their residences in the evening. More than 3½ million people travel by train every day from north to south Mumbai or south to north Mumbai. We are surprised as to how the State Government and the railway authorities permit construction of such shanties next to the railway-lines which happened illegally, and when such illegally constructed buildings collapsed on the railway track, that had resulted in the accidents. We are further surprised that

¶21

3 / 4

¶22

WPL. 1187-15

¶23

these occupants manage to get ration card, electricity connections, free water connection, PAN card.

¶24

However, it is for the State Government and Railway Authorities to ensure that at least such shanties are not allowed to mushroom near few fts. from the railway track.

¶25

We are, therefore, not inclined to grant interim relief to the Petitioners. Petitioners, however, may make representation for permanent alternate accommodation pursuant to the directives issued by the World Bank under R & R Policy for MUTP 2000. If such a representation is made by the Petitioners, MMRDA shall examine all the documents and decide the said representation on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 4 weeks, and if they fulfill the criteria laid down by the said Policy, MMRDA shall ensure that they are given permanent alternate accommodation. All contentions raised by the Petitioners and the Respondents in this petition are kept open. With these directions, writ petition is disposed of.

¶26

Vinayak Halemath

¶27

4 / 4

M/S Shiv Sai Welfare Society v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Shiv Sai Welfare Society v. the Union of India and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Dipak Digambar Naik and Ors. Vs Bank of Maharashtra and Anr.

M/S. Sara Commodities Pvt. Ltd. Vs Indian Overseas Bank

Ms Smita Bhartia and 2 Others Vs Securities and Exchange Board of India

Rolv Berg Drive a/S Vs Oil and Natural Gas Corporaton Limited and Anr.

M/S. Maruti Goods Movers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India

Shree Sai Enterprises Vs Maharashtra Telephone Nigam Ltd. and Anr.