Back
1996 Supreme(Del) 493
High Court Of Delhi
TUGLAKABAD JHUGGI JHOMPRI WELFARE ASSOCIATION - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Decided On : 07/01/1996
Unauthorized encroachment on public land, particularly in sensitive areas like Railway land, does not confer legal rights to the encroachers, and their eviction does not violate their right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Headnote:
TUGLAKABAD JHUGGI JHOMPRI WELFARE ASSOCIATION V. UNION OF INDIA - ARTICLE 21 - ARTICLE 226 - BOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1988 - NATIONAL HOUSING POLICY, 1988 - OLGA TELLIS AND OTHERS V. BOMBAY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS - SUMMARY DISMISSAL OF WRIT PETITION SEEKING RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST DEMOLITION OF JHUGGIES ON RAILWAY LAND WITHOUT ALTERNATIVE ACCOMMODATION.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner Association sought a writ to restrain the demolition of approximately 2,000 Jhuggi Jhompris on Railway land near the Tuglakabad Railway Station, claiming that the dwellers had been residing there for over 15 years and had ration cards, voter IDs, and had participated in elections. The Railways, as respondents, asserted that the Jhuggis were unauthorized constructions on sensitive Railway land near a power cabin, military movement area, and an Oil Petrol Depot, posing safety hazards to the dwellers.
Finding of the Court:
The Court acknowledged that the land belonged to the Railways and that the dwellers had no legal ownership rights. It recognized the National Housing Policy's goal of addressing the housing needs of slum dwellers but emphasized that it lacked statutory force and was not relevant in the present case.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners, as unauthorized encroachers on Railway land, could claim legal rights to the land under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 2. Whether the eviction of the petitioners from the Jhuggis would violate their right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the petitioners, as encroachers on Railway land, could not claim legal rights to the land through Article 226, particularly when the ownership of the land was undisputed. It emphasized the importance of preventing the legalization of encroachments and the need to prioritize the safety of the dwellers in hazardous areas. 2. The Court distinguished the case from Olga Tellis and Others v. Bombay Municipal Corporation and Others, which dealt with the eviction of slum and pavement dwellers in Bombay, stating that the facts in that case were different and that the encroachment of public places for private purposes could not be claimed as a right.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioners had no legal rights to the encroached Railway land and that their eviction did not violate their right to livelihood. However, to minimize hardship, the Court directed the respondents not to remove the Jhuggis until August 31, 1996.
( 1 ) THE present petition is filed by one Tuglakabad Jhuggi Jhompri Welfare Association for an appropriate writ, direction or order for restraining the respondents from demolishing about 2,000 Jhuggi Jhompris which are allegedly threatened to be demolished by the respondents without first providing the dwellers alternative accommodation/ plots.
( 2 ) THE petitioner Association has filed this petition in the representative capacity seeking issue of necessary relief not to demolish the Jhuggi Jhompris in existence intuglakabad Jhuggi Jhompricomplex near Tuglakabad Railway Station. It is stated that the dwellers have been staying in the Jhuggis for the last over 15 years. They allegedly have ration cards as well as are shown in the voters list and have participated and exercised the rights of franchise in the elections at different levels held in the years 1983,1987,1990 as-well as in 1994 and the current elections held this year. The lands on which these unauthoris constructions have taken place over the years, admittedly, belong to the Railways.
( 3 ) RESPONDENTS 3 and 4 who are the General Manager and Divisional Railway Manager have filed counter affidavit wherein it is reiterated that the entire Railway line in or around the Railway Station on which the petitioners have allegedly and unauthorisedly raised Jhuggi Jhompris can be divided in the following three clusters:
(A) Cluster No. I in and around Tuglakabad Railway Station and known as "near STATION". (B) Cluster No. 2 in and around New Power Cabin, known as "new POWER CABINS". (C) Cluster No. 3, near the running room and Nala and known as " near NALA". It is further stated in the affidavit that all the Jhuggi Jhompris raised in clusters I to 3 are in an area which is very sensitive from the Railway point of view inasmuch as there is a power cabin existing near duster No. 2 from where substantial number of trains are being operated and controlled. Moreover, there is a military movement in the area and heavy artillery is loaded and unloaded as well as there is huge Oil Petrol Depot existing in the said area and there is large and substantial storage of diesel. The dwellers have continuously, illegally and unauthorisedly occupied the Railway land and despite best efforts the same could not be cleared thus causing continuous threat even to the dwellers which include older people, men, women and children. The clearing operation was, accordingly, initiated on 10th January, 1996.
( 4 ) DR. Wadhera who has appeared for the petitioner Association has fairly conceded that the land, admittedly, belongs to the Railways and the dwellers have no right, title on the ownership of the land. He has, however, sought reliance on the document which is filed as Annexure II-A to the writ petition known as "national Housing Policy" as laid on the table of both the Houses of Parliament on 12th May, 1988. The said policy took into consideration the fact that a sizeable proportion of the urban population had inadequate housing and many have taken recourse to take shelter in slums and squatter settlements. There is, therefore, a multi-faced problem to tackle for housing for this section of the population. The relevant details are referred to in the said document as filed with this petition. Dr. Wadhera has referred to Clauses (b), (e), (d), (g) and (h) which may be reproduced as follows to include:
" (B) Conferring tenurial rights at reasonable rates ,on slums dwellers as per "approved norms in respect of land occupied by them, whatever possible. (e) Re-locating slums dwellers and squatters, to extent possible wherever conferment of tenurial right in respect of the land occupied by them is not feasible. (d) assembling and allocating land for making available sites and services; (g) involving the slum dwellers in slum improvement and upgradation programmes by adopting a self help and community approach in the maintenance and improvement of their settlements; (h) facilitating the formation o
