Residents of Sheva Koliwada move Bombay HC over four-decade wait for rehabilitation
Residents of Sheva Koliwada in Uran taluka of Raigad district, Maharashtra, who have spent the past 40 years in a transit camp, have approached the Bombay High Court against multiple authorities — including the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Authority (JNPA), the Ministry of Ports, Shipping and Waterways, the Divisional Commissioner of Konkan Division, the Raigad District Collector, and CIDCO — alleging false assurances regarding rehabilitation.
Filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petition seeks judicial directions against JNPA for what the petitioners describe as a gross failure to fulfil statutory obligations under the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1976.
The petitioners — the Maharashtra Small Scale Traditional Fish Workers Union, represented by its president Nandkumar W. Pawar and secretary Ramesh B. Koli — are seeking appropriate orders for permanent and adequate rehabilitation of 256 families displaced due to land acquisition for the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Project (JNPT).
The petition urges time-bound implementation of a rehabilitation plan approved on January 24, which includes the allocation of 10.16 hectares of land, interim relief, compensation for prolonged displacement, and the appointment of a court-monitored committee to oversee the implementation process.
The prolonged struggle has drawn media and administrative attention in recent years. A report titled '40 years in a transit camp' published in The Hindu on November 16, 2024, and a follow-up story on November 20, 2024, highlighted electoral boycotts by the affected community. Following the coverage, officials from the Election Commission of India and the Raigad District Collector visited the area, promising to convey residents' demands to higher authorities. On December 19, 2024, a senior Union government official gave a verbal assurance that permanent housing would soon be provided.
However, on April 14, more than 400 residents protested outside the tehsildar's office, displaying a photograph of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and a copy of the Constitution, in a symbolic plea for justice. The protest was held to draw attention to the community's displacement and the delay in rehabilitation by the State and Central governments.
Also Read | Party workers tried to force us to vote, Sheva Koliwada transit camp residents say
The petition, filed through advocate Siddharth Sonaji Ingle, also seeks ₹50 lakh compensation for each family, citing 'undue hardship, delay, and mental anguish' caused by the non-implementation of rehabilitation measures despite multiple government assurances over four decades.
The residents have also demanded immediate upgrades to existing transit camp facilities, including provision of safe drinking water, sanitation, drainage, reliable electricity, structural safety, and other essential services for the project-affected families.
Mr. Ramesh Koli, 65, said, 'We have had several meetings with all kinds of government officials all these years, from CMs, to Guardian Ministers, to different Union ministers... We staged protests, filed RTIs, took the matter to Lokayukta, we have been made to run from pillar to post... governments changed in this State and country, but we have remained in the same transit camp, waiting for our independence, hoping some day we will get our lost homes, our village that the country took away from us in the name of development and forgot about the people behind the mega project.'
He further stated that affected families were given assurances of employment and local business opportunities during the displacement process. 'But till date no one from affected fisherfolk families received any employment or any business to sustain their families,' he said.
'We are aboriginal, indigenous community of this region who have lost everything under the guise of development. Traditional fishing practices have dwindled due to fishing zones being allotted for various projects and heavy industrial pollution. We are left with no future for our young generation despite the fact that several coastal projects are running their business on our traditional fishing land. Is this democracy or dictatorship?' Mr. Koli added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
41 minutes ago
- The Hindu
U.S. top court upholds ban on gender-affirming care for minors
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday (June 18, 2025) upheld a state law banning gender-affirming medical treatments for transgender minors – an issue at the heart of the American culture wars. The court voted 6-3 to uphold a Tennessee law barring hormone therapy, puberty blockers and gender transition surgery for those under the age of 18. The six conservative justices on the top court rejected a challenge to the law while the three liberals dissented. Two dozen Republican-led states have enacted laws restricting medical care for transgender youth, and the case will have repercussions for the prohibitions across the country. 'This case carries with it the weight of fierce scientific and policy debates about the safety, efficacy, and propriety of medical treatments in an evolving field,' wrote Chief Justice John Roberts, author of the majority opinion. 'The Court's role is not 'to judge the wisdom, fairness, or logic' (of the law) but only to ensure that the law does not violate equal protection guarantees,' Mr. Roberts said. 'It does not. Questions regarding the law's policy are thus appropriately left to the people, their elected representatives, and the democratic process,' he added. The Supreme Court heard the case in December, and the Justice Department of then-president Joe Biden joined opponents of the law, arguing that it violated the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause since it denies transgender minors access to medical treatments permitted to others. Republican President Donald Trump has since taken office, and he signed an executive order in January restricting gender transition procedures for people under the age of 19. While there is no U.S.-wide law against gender-affirming medical treatments for transgender youth, the Mr. Trump order ended any federal backing for such procedures. Reacting to the ruling, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) said it 'sets a dangerous precedent for legislative interference in the practice of medicine.' 'Gender-affirming care is medically necessary for treating gender dysphoria and is backed by decades of peer-reviewed research, clinical experience, and scientific consensus,' the AAP said. 'Denying patients access to this care not only undermines their health and safety, but it also robs them of basic human dignity.' 'Must end' The Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative legal group, welcomed the ruling as a 'huge win for children' and a 'step toward ending dangerous experiments on kids.' During oral arguments in December, Tennessee Solicitor General Matthew Rice told the court the law was designed to 'protect minors from risky, unproven medical interventions' with 'often irreversible and life-altering consequences.' Chase Strangio, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney representing three transgender adolescents, their parents, and a Memphis-based doctor, countered that the law has 'taken away the only treatment that relieved years of suffering.' 'What they've done is impose a blunderbuss ban, overriding the very careful judgment of parents who love and care for their children and the doctors who have recommended the treatment,' said Mr. Strangio, the first openly transgender lawyer to argue before the court. Mr. Trump, in his inauguration speech, said his government would henceforth only recognise two genders – male and female – and he issued his executive order a week later restricting gender transition procedures for minors. 'Across the country today, medical professionals are maiming and sterilising a growing number of impressionable children,' the executive order said. 'This dangerous trend will be a stain on our Nation's history, and it must end.' Mr. Trump's order said it would now be U.S. policy that it would 'not fund, sponsor, promote, assist, or support the so-called 'transition' of a child from one sex to another.' The order bars funding for gender transition under the Medicaid health insurance program for poor families, the Medicare scheme used by retirees, and Defense Department health insurance that covers some two million children. According to a study by UCLA's Williams Institute, an estimated 1.6 million people aged 13 and older in the United States identify as transgender.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Without addressing inequalities, no nation can claim to be truly democratic: CJI Gavai
New Delhi, Without addressing the structural inequalities that marginalise large sections of society, no nation can claim to be truly progressive or democratic, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai said on Wednesday while emphasising that socio-economic justice is a practical necessity for achieving long-term stability, social cohesion, and sustainable development. Speaking at a function in Milan on the topic of "Role of Constitution in Delivering Socio-Economic Justice in a Country: Reflections from 75 Years of Indian Constitution", the CJI said that justice is not an abstract ideal and it must take root in social structures, in the distribution of opportunity, and in the conditions under which people live. "Without addressing the structural inequalities that marginalise large sections of society, no nation can claim to be truly progressive or democratic. Socio-economic justice, in other words, a practical necessity for achieving long-term stability, social cohesion, and sustainable development," he said. The CJI said that it is not merely a matter of redistribution or welfare but it is also about enabling every person to live with dignity, to realise their full human potential, and to participate as equals in the social, economic, and political life of the country. "Thus, for any country, socio-economic justice is a crucial aspect of national progress. It ensures that development is inclusive, that opportunities are equitably distributed, and that all individuals, regardless of their social or economic background, can live with dignity and freedom," he said. Thanking the Chamber of International Lawyers for inviting him to deliver a speech on the topic, CJI Gavai said the journey of the Indian Constitution over the past seventy-five years in delivering socio-economic justice is a story of great ambition and important successes. "As Chief Justice of India, I take pride in stating that the framers of the Indian Constitution were deeply conscious of the imperative of socio-economic justice while drafting its provisions. Its drafting took place in the aftermath of a long and hard-fought struggle for independence from colonial rule," he said. He said affirmative action policies in education, which sought to correct historical injustices and ensure representation of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and socially and educationally backward classes, have been a concrete expression of the Constitution's commitment to substantive equality and socio-economic justice. "I have often said, and I reiterate here today, that it is because of this constitutional vision of inclusion and transformation that I am standing before you as the Chief Justice of India. Coming from a historically marginalised background, I am a product of the very constitutional ideals that sought to democratise opportunity and dismantle the barriers of caste and exclusion," he said. Elaborating further, the CJI said the Constitution has given people the vision, the tools, and the moral guidance and it has shown that law can indeed be a tool for social change, a force for empowerment, and a protector of the vulnerable. CJI Gavai added that the Indian Constitution, which was adopted on January 26, 1950, is not just a political document for governance, but is a promise to society, a revolutionary statement, and a ray of hope for a country coming out of long years of colonial rule, suffering from poverty, inequality, and social divisions. "It was a promise of a new beginning where social and economic justice would be the main goal of our country. At its core, the Indian Constitution upholds the ideals of freedom and equality for all," he said. He said that over the past 75 years, India's Constitution has played a major role in advancing socio-economic justice for its citizens and in fact, the earliest and most significant steps toward this goal were initiated by the Indian Parliament. "The tension between Parliament and the judiciary, particularly concerning the scope of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution, revolved around a fundamental question: how far could constitutional amendments go? While this episode is often remembered as an institutional rivalry between the judiciary and Parliament, it is important to recognise that it unfolded against the backdrop of efforts to realise socio-economic rights,' he said, while recalling the backdrop of the 1973 landmark verdict in the Kesavananda Bharati case. He added that efforts to reduce poverty, enhance job creation and provide basic services like food, housing, and healthcare have also been critical to India's social policy landscape in the recent decades. "I can say that both Parliament and the judiciary have expanded the scope of socio-economic rights in the 21st century," he underscored. CJI Gavai referred to the recent verdict on the issue of demolition of structures where the court examined the decisions of the state authorities to demolish homes and properties of an accused, as a punishment even before they were convicted by a court of law. "Here, the Court held that such arbitrary demolitions, which bypass legal processes, violate the rule of law and the fundamental right to shelter under Article 21. The executive cannot become judge, jury, and executioner all at once," he said, adding that the decision reaffirmed that constitutional guarantees must not only protect civil liberties but must also uphold the dignity, security, and material well-being of every individual, especially the vulnerable.
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Raj Bhavan not a platform for RSS agenda, says Kerala Chief Minister amid portrait row
Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan on Wednesday criticised the display of a Bharat Mata portrait at Raj Bhavan, stating that the Governor's office should not be used to promote the ideological agenda of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Responding to a question about the controversy surrounding RSS-linked images displayed at Raj Bhavan here, Mr. Vijayan told a press conference that the Governor's residence must remain neutral and should not be turned into a platform for political propaganda. 'It is unacceptable to make the Governor's residence a venue for pushing the RSS agenda. This trend is a direct challenge to the Constitution,' he said. The Chief Minister was referring to a recently displayed portrait of Bharat Mata, holding a saffron flag, at an event inside the Governor's official residence. He pointed out that the flag in the image is not the Indian national flag but one associated with the RSS. 'They may accept it, but insisting that everyone else must accept it is not right,' the Chief Minister said. Mr. Vijayan added that the image of Bharat Mata shown did not even feature the actual map of India in the background. 'We are not obliged to accept anything that is not recognised by the Constitution,' he said. A notice from Raj Bhavan reportedly stated that only officially approved symbols will be displayed at government events in future. Mr. Vijayan said the Governor must also be aware of this position. 'Raj Bhavan should not be reduced to the level of an RSS shakha (branch),' he added. The remarks come amid an escalating political row between the State government and the Governor over the use of ideological imagery in official spaces. Referring to the boycott of an Environment Day programme organised at Raj Bhavan by Agriculture Minister P. Prasad over the display of the Bharat Mata image, Mr. Vijayan said that was the State government's clear stance on the matter. 'We may have personal affinities towards many ideologies, faiths and actions related to them. But at government events, only government-recognised symbols should be present. A deviation from that was seen at Raj Bhavan, and the Agriculture Minister rightly said it could not be accepted,' the Chief Minister said. 'Later, the Governor also became convinced and clarified that such symbols would not be included in official programmes,' Mr. Vijayan claimed. Whatever the case may be, the government's position is very clear -- programmes must follow the recognised format, and no exhibitions should be held based on individual interests, he added.
