Encroachers can't claim right to occupy public land during rehab: Delhi High Court
NEW DELHI: A nearly 30-year-old slum cluster in South Delhi's Kalkaji is set for demolition after the Delhi High Court ruled that encroachers cannot indefinitely occupy public land while their rehabilitation claims are pending. The court observed that permitting such occupation would obstruct crucial public works and development projects.
The order, delivered on June 6 by Justice Dharmesh Sharma, came while hearing a batch of petitions filed by residents of Bhoomiheen Camp, an informal settlement largely inhabited by migrants from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, and West Bengal. Around 1,200 people had approached the court seeking a stay on demolition, asking the DDA to maintain status quo and not evict them until they were surveyed and rehabilitated under the 2015 Delhi Slum and JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy. The court, however, dismissed their plea, noting that the petitions were flawed due to improper clubbing of multiple parties and causes of action. It further stated that the petitioners had failed to meet the eligibility conditions under the 2015 policy to qualify for rehabilitation.
'None of the petitioners have any legal right to continue occupying the JJ cluster incessantly, to the detriment of the public at large,' the court said, adding that the right to rehabilitation arises only from policy, not from the Constitution. It also clarified that removal of encroachments and eligibility for rehabilitation are separate processes and pending claims cannot justify delaying demolition. The court allowed the DDA to proceed with demolition as per law and directed that eligible residents be allotted flats under EWS category.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
18 minutes ago
- United News of India
SC declines urgent listing of Tamil Nadu's suit for Rs 2,291 crore education funds
New Delhi, June 9 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Monday declined to urgently list a suit filed by the Tamil Nadu government against the Union Government, seeking the release of over Rs 2,291 crore under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme (SSS). A bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan rejected the plea for early listing during the court's partial working days, observing that there was "no urgency" in the matter. Senior Advocate P. Wilson, representing the Tamil Nadu government, pressed for an urgent hearing, arguing that nearly 48 lakh students in the state were being deprived of essential education funds. 'All students in Tamil Nadu are being denied their right to education funds by the central government. The new academic year began on June 3, and admissions are underway,' Wilson submitted. When Justice Mishra enquired when the funds had stopped, Wilson responded that the funds had not been released since last year and that the original suit was filed on May 20, 2025. Despite this, the bench declined the urgent listing request. Tamil Nadu has approached the Supreme Court under Article 131 of the Constitution, accusing the Centre of unlawfully withholding funds under the SSS. The state contends that the denial is tied to its non-implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the PM SHRI (Schools for Rising India) scheme. In its suit, Tamil Nadu seeks a direction for the Union Government to release the pending Rs 2,291 crore along with applicable interest. The state also seeks a declaration that making the release of SSS funds contingent upon the adoption of NEP 2020 and the PM SHRI scheme is 'unconstitutional, illegal, unreasonable, and arbitrary. UNI SNG ARN
United News of India
an hour ago
- United News of India
SC grants interim protection from arrest to MP journalists alleging police assault
New Delhi, Jun 9 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Monday granted interim protection from arrest to two Madhya Pradesh-based journalists who alleged custodial torture, caste-based abuse, and death threats from Bhind police officials, including Superintendent of Police Asit Yadav. The petitioners, journalists Shashikant Jatav and Amarkant Singh Chouhan, approached the apex court under Article 32 of the Constitution, claiming that they were assaulted by the state police for reporting on the alleged exploitation of the Chambal River by the sand mafia. A bench comprising justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan, while declining to entertain the writ petition, directed the journalists to move the Madhya Pradesh High Court within two weeks. 'We are not inclined to entertain this petition under Article 32,' the bench said. 'However, looking at the allegations, we permit the petitioners to move the concerned High Court within two weeks from today. Till then, the petitioners shall not be arrested.' Counsel for the journalists pleaded for protection, saying, 'We are fearing for our lives. Kindly protect us for at least two weeks.' The court granted the limited interim relief but made it clear that all further remedies must be sought before the appropriate high court. The case brings to light serious concerns regarding alleged police high-handedness and intimidation of media personnel covering illegal activities in the region. UNI SNG PRS
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
SC refuses urgent hearing to TN's plea against Centre over education funds
The Supreme Court on Monday refused to accord urgent hearing to a plea filed by the Tamil Nadu government against the Centre for allegedly withholding over Rs 2,151 crore in central education funds under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme for 2024-2025. A bench comprising Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Manmohan took note of the fact that the state government filed the petition in May alleging withholding of central funds for 2024 and this year also. "There is no urgency and it can be taken up after the 'partial working days' (the new name of summer vacation)," the bench said. In May, the Tamil Nadu government moved the top court against the Centre for allegedly withholding the funds. The DMK government's plea, filed against the Union Ministry of Education, invokes Article 131 of the Constitution which provides exclusive jurisdiction to the top court to hear pleas between the Centre and one or more states, or between one or more states. The state government alleged the Centre attempted to force the implementation of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and the associated PM SHRI Schools Scheme which it strongly objected to, particularly the contentious three-language formula. The top court, therefore, was urged to declare that the NEP and the PM SHRI Schools Scheme are not binding on the plaintiff state unless and until a formal agreement is entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant for their implementation within Tamil Nadu. The lawsuit has also sought a declaration that the action of the Centre to link Tamil Nadu's entitlement to receive funds under the Samagra Shiksha Scheme to the implementation of the NEP, 2020, and the PM SHRI Schools Scheme within the state are unconstitutional, illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable. It has also urged the top court to declare the Centre's letters of February 23, 2024 and March 07, 2024 as illegal, null, void ab initio and not binding on the state government. The plea sought a direction to the Centre to pay "Rs 2,291,30,24,769 (two thousand two hundred and ninety-one crore thirty lakhs twenty-four thousand seven hundred and sixty-nine) within a time frame to be fixed by this court" along with a future interest of 6 per cent per annum on the "principal sum of Rs 2,151,59,61,000 (two thousand one hundred and fifty-one crore fifty nine lakh and sixty one thousand) from May 1, 2025 until realisation of the decree". The dispute stems from the non-release of central funds under the Scheme, a flagship centrally sponsored programme for school education aimed at universalising quality education. The Project Approval Board (PAB) of the Ministry of Education had approved a total outlay of Rs 3,585.99 crore for Tamil Nadu for FY 2024 25, of which the Union Government's committed 60 per cent share amounted to Rs 2,151.59 crore. The plea said despite this approval, no instalments have been disbursed by the Centre as yet. The Centre, it said, unilaterally linked the release of these funds to Tamil Nadu's full implementation of NEP 2020 and the signing of an MoU for the PM SHRI Schools Scheme, conditions which were neither part of the original Samagra Shiksha Scheme nor agreed upon by the state. The reason for such non-disbursement is that the defendant has linked the release of Samagra Shiksha Scheme funds with the implementation of national education policy and NEP exemplary PM SHRI Schools' Scheme despite the fact that these policy/scheme are separate schemes, it said. Referring to the impact of non-release of Samagra Shiksha funds, the plea said paying salaries was crucial in maintaining competent and motivated teachers and supporting staff. It directly impacts the quality of education provided to students and contributes to overall societal development by nurturing the next generation with the skills and knowledge needed for success, it added.
