Land-pooling policy: Does policy have provision for rehab of landless labourers, HC asks Punjab
The court also asked the state government to spell out whether the policy --- that has raised the hackles of Opposition leaders and farmers --- had provisions for rehabilitation of landless labourers and others.
These questions were raised by the bench of justice Anupinder Singh Grewal and justice Deepak Manchanda, while the state's advocate general Maninderjit Singh gave an undertaking that the policy would be kept on hold and no further steps would be taken till the next date of hearing. The matter will be taken up again on Thursday.
The petition was filed by Ludhiana resident Gurdeep Singh Gill who had challenged the policy, notified on June 4, stating that around 26,000 acres of land in the district had been notified for setting up of residential and commercial projects without carrying out the necessary environment and social impact assessment which is an essential prerequisite for acquisition of land under Sections 4 to 8 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
Even the assessment as to whether it will serve the 'public purpose' for setting up residential and commercial complexes as set out in the Act of 2013 was not undertaken, he had alleged further underlining that a large number of public/private housing/commercial projects are already underway and are more than adequate to meet the existing and future needs of the public. Hence, the Act of 2013 is being circumvented and the policy is wholly arbitrary and irrational, the plea alleged. It was also argued that there is no provision for providing compensation at the time of acquisition and only an annual livelihood allowance of ₹50,000/- per acre would be paid but it would be too meagre for the sustenance of families of small and marginal farmers, who would be affected adversely. The policy is discriminatory against small landowners, he further claimed.
The court while deferring hearing asked the AG to inform the court if the environmental impact assessment had been carried for which directions were issued by the Supreme Court in 2023 while observing that before permitting urban development, the environmental impact assessment study should be conducted.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
27 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
CJI Gavai inaugurates Gauhati high court's permanent bench in Arunachal
Itanagar: Chief Justice of India (CJI) B R Gavai on Sunday inaugurated the newly built permanent bench of the Gauhati high court at Naharlagun, calling it a 'historic step' towards making justice more accessible and affordable in the state and the Northeast. CJI Gavai lauded the Gauhati high court's leadership for expanding judicial access in remote areas. The inauguration was attended by Union minister for parliamentary affairs Kiren Rijiju, Union minister of state for law and justice Arjun Ram Meghwal, chief justice of Gauhati high court Ashutosh Kumar, judges from the Supreme Court, Gauhati high court, and the Itanagar permanent bench, along with several eminent judges from high courts across the country. Addressing the gathering, Gavai advocated decentralisation of judicial services, stressing that justice must be delivered at people's doorsteps. He said the judiciary, legislature and executive are meant to serve every citizen, not just the privileged few. The CJI praised the Gauhati high court's leadership for expanding judicial access in remote areas and lauded Arunachal's cultural richness — home to 26 major tribes and over 100 sub-tribes. 'Preserving and conserving our traditions is a fundamental duty under the Constitution,' he said, adding that progress must not come at the cost of heritage. Quoting B R Ambedkar, he described the Constitution as the 'great granth' of the nation and underlined the importance of Schedules V and VI in safeguarding the rights and culture of tribal communities. 'Political equality without economic and social equality has no value,' he said. Chief minister Pema Khandu called the occasion 'a momentous day in the judicial history of Arunachal Pradesh and India,' describing the state-of-the-art facility as 'a symbol of hope, accessibility, and unwavering pursuit of justice.' The foundation stone for the 19,000-plus square metre structure was laid on August 12, 2018, by Khandu. Despite challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic, difficult terrain, long monsoon seasons, and high logistics costs, construction was completed in less than four years at a cost of nearly ₹250 crore. The CM credited the achievement to the collaborative efforts of the Gauhati high court, members of the Bar, state government officials, the PWD, and the contractor. Highlighting the state's progress in judicial infrastructure, Khandu said Arunachal Pradesh had expanded from just two courts in 2016, when he first assumed charge, to 33 functional courts today, with eight added recently and 463 new posts created in the district judiciary. Welfare measures for judicial officers, procedural reforms, and dedicated NDPS courts in Tezu, Khonsa, and Yupia are also underway. 'The inauguration of this court is the fulfilment of a long-cherished dream of our people. It will enhance access to justice, ensure speedy resolution of cases, and strengthen the rule of law in our state,' he said, reaffirming his government's commitment to strengthen the justice delivery system from the high court to district and CJM courts. Gauhati high court chief justice Ashutosh Kumar said the new building reaffirmed the constitutional promise of justice unhampered by geography. 'Let Arunachal be the place where justice comes first without delay, just as it witnesses the first sunrise,' he remarked, describing courts as 'temples of constitutional morality.' Union minister Kiren Rijiju and Supreme Court judges Ujjal Bhuyan, N Kotiswar Singh, Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi also hailed the new facility as a leap forward for the frontier state. Spread over more than 19,000 sq metres, the complex houses five modern courtrooms and state-of-the-art facilities, and was built by the public works department, marking a significant step in bridging the justice gap for one of the country's most geographically challenging regions.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Can teachers opt out? What Mahmoud v. Taylor means for freedom of belief in schools
Supreme Court rules in Mahmoud v. Taylor on parental opt-out rights in U.S. schools. (AI Image) In a significant decision on education and religious rights, the US Supreme Court ruled in favour of parents in Mahmoud v. Taylor, a case involving the Montgomery County Public School District in Maryland. The case centred on whether parents could opt their children out of lessons involving LGBTQ+-themed storybooks due to religious objections. The 6–3 ruling sided with parents who argued that their First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion had been violated when the district removed an opt-out provision. The Court found that failing to provide such an option imposed an undue burden on religious freedom. Details of the case and the parties involved The case was brought by a group of parents from various religious backgrounds, including Ukrainian Orthodox, Catholic, and Muslim communities. These parents objected to the inclusion of books featuring LGBTQ+ themes in the primary school curriculum for children aged five to eleven. They requested advance notice of when the books would be used in class and the ability to withdraw their children from those lessons. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Treatment That Might Help You Against Knee Pain Knee pain| search ads Find Now Undo Montgomery County Public Schools had introduced a broader curriculum incorporating storybooks that addressed race, gender, sexual orientation, and other identities, stating the goal was to foster inclusivity and awareness. The school district argued that the inclusion of diverse narratives aimed to affirm the existence and rights of various identities. Legal arguments and constitutional basis The petitioning parents relied on previous Supreme Court precedents, such as West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette and Wisconsin v. Yoder, both of which supported parental authority in the religious upbringing of their children. They contended that without the ability to opt out, the school was compelling their children to participate in lessons conflicting with their religious beliefs. The school district maintained that it was not infringing upon religious freedom but promoting a diverse and respectful learning environment. It argued that allowing opt-outs could undermine the purpose of the curriculum and exclude certain student identities from classroom recognition. Supreme Court ruling and its provisions The Supreme Court held that the school district's actions constituted an undue burden on the parents' religious rights under the First Amendment. The ruling mandates that schools must provide parents with advance notice of when such materials will be used and allow them to withdraw their children from those specific sessions if they object on religious grounds. Broader implications and future considerations Assistant Professor of Law Jeremiah Chin explained that the ruling may have far-reaching implications. He noted that while the decision appears narrow, it follows a trend in recent Court rulings that expand the Free Exercise Clause, allowing individuals increased authority to challenge government actions on religious grounds. The case also raises questions about the rights of children, though the ruling focused exclusively on the conflict between parents and the school district. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here . Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Hindustan Times
5 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Justice must reach people's doorsteps, not remain in halls of power: CJI
Itanagar, Chief Justice of India B R Gavai on Sunday said the judiciary, legislature, and executive exist solely to serve the people and ensure justice is delivered swiftly and at minimal cost. Justice must reach people's doorsteps, not remain in halls of power: CJI "I have always been a staunch supporter of decentralisation. Justice should reach people's doorsteps," he said after inaugurating the newly constructed Gauhati High Court, Itanagar Permanent Bench building here. "Neither the courts, nor the judiciary, nor the legislature exist for the royals, judges, or members of the executive. We all exist to give justice to the people," he said. Gavai lauded successive chief justices of the Gauhati High Court for working to make justice more accessible. Commending Arunachal Pradesh's unity in diversity, the CJI said, the state has 26 major tribes and over 100 sub-tribes. The government has made efforts to preserve and promote the traditions and culture of every tribe. "The country must progress, but not at the cost of our culture and traditions. It is one of our fundamental duties under the Constitution to preserve and conserve them," he said. Recalling his visits to several northeastern states in the past two years, Gavai said he was 'mesmerised' by the vibrant tribal culture. Referring to a recent visit to shelter homes in strife-torn Manipur, Gavai said, "A woman there told me, 'You are welcome to your home'. It touched my heart because for all of us, India is one, and for all Indians, India is their home." Quoting B R Ambedkar, he said: "Baba Saheb was a staunch supporter of India's unity. He always said, 'India first and India last'. He assured that our Constitution will keep India united and strong in times of peace and war, which we have witnessed even after 75 years." "Every religion has its own 'dharma granth' , but for every Indian, the Constitution is the great 'granth'. Our first allegiance must be to it," he added, urging citizens to read the document. Gavai also cited Ambedkar's reminder that 'political equality without economic and social equality has no value', and stressed the importance of constitutional provisions under Schedules V and VI to protect the culture and traditions of the Northeast's tribal communities. Earlier, Chief Justice of Gauhati High Court Ashutosh Kumar said the new building reaffirms the Constitutional promise of justice without geographical barriers. "Let Arunachal be the place where justice comes first without delay, just as it witnesses the first sunrise," he said adding, court buildings are not just infrastructure, they are temples of Constitutional morality. Supreme Court judges Ujjal Bhuyan, N Kotiswar Singh, Sandeep Mehta, and Vijay Bishnoi also spoke on the occasion. The ₹135.35 crore state-of-the-art complex, housing five courtrooms and modern facilities, was built by the Public Works Department. Construction began in February 2021, following the foundation laid by Chief Minister Pema Khandu in 2018. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
