SC Acted In Right Spirit

The Supreme Court’s stay on eviction of encroachments on 29-acres of railway land at Kathgodam, Haldwani has come as a relief to hundreds of families, residing there for decades. The ruling has given a breather to 4,365 persons who had been served notices on December 20, 2022 to vacate the railway yard in order that the Railways could take up the yard development.

The petitioners represented by eminent lawyers from Delhi had prayed that they cannot be uprooted from the land overnight as they had lived there for decades and many of them had titles for the property.

The Railways had sought the eviction on the basis of a ruling from the Uttarakhand High Court which had instructed the administration to get the land vacated under the Public Premises Act and has even asked it to use the paramilitary forces. They petitioners had contended that the High Court ruling had even asked the use of paramilitary forces. The ruling by apex court bench consisting of Justice Sajay Kishan Kaul and Justice A. S.

Oka found merit in the defence side plea that the issue had a human angle and people living there for 50 to 70 years cannot be evicted in a week. Though this time, it was the Railways that had sought eviction from the railway yard in this case, the incident is reminiscent of the bulldozer politics being played out in the Hindi heartland where the urban administrations have been deploying bulldozers to terrorise people, mainly belonging to the minority communities.

The demolition of homes is rooted mainly in the communal bias which is apparent from behind the thin veneer of the municipal regulation. The apex court had even on June 16, 2022 stressed that demolitions can be carried out only in accordance with the law and not as a retaliatory exercise by the state.

 It had said, “Everything should look fair, we expect the authorities to act only in accordance with the law.” Prior to this, the Prayag Raj and Kanpur Municipal Corporations had resorted to demolition of homes of certain individuals citing violation of urban regulations thereby thinly masking the vindictive action against those who had engaged in opposition politics.

That the demolition order passed the muster of the Uttarakhand High Court and the aggrieved had to knock at the doors of the Supreme Court is a poignant commentary on the state of the temples of justice which fail to see the human angle. Surprisingly, the administrations have invariably presented themselves as upholders of the rule of law and principles of governance while carrying out such outrageous action or passing out stringent executive fiats.

Democracy being the rule of the people, by the people and for people, any drastic action against people that violates their personal liberty, uproots or displaces them from home and habitations and wrests their livelihood should be subject to social impact assessment, negotiation and possibly rehabilitation rather than arbitrary action.

Ignoring this basic rule, deletes the demarcation line between democratic governance and authoritarian regimes. It is indeed comforting that the apex court’s timely intervention has etched to broad relief the essence of the Constitution and averted a catastrophe that could have been the result.