Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 3593-05 of 2003
PETITIONER:
Union of India
RESPONDENT:
Howrah Ganatantrik Nagarik Samity & Ors.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/04/2003
BENCH:
N.Santosh Hegde & B.P.Singh.
JUDGMENT:
J U D G M E N T
(Arising out of SLP Nos.17203-17205 of 1999)
SANTOSH HEGDE,J.
(With SLP No.9827/2002)
Leave granted. SLPNo.9827/2002 is de-linked from
C.A.Nos...of 2003 @ SLPNos. 17203-205/99.
Heard learned counsel.
Union of India through Eastern Railway, Calcutta is
challenging an order made by Calcutta High Court dated 18.6.1999 in
Writ Petition Nos. 12902/97 and 1322/98 pending in the file of the
High Court of Judicature at Calcutta. A Division Bench of the said
High Court while considering the above noted writ petitions filed
before it for seeking eviction of illegal squatters in the railway
property, as also areas besides Rabindra Sarobar, directed the State of
West Bengal and Railway administration as an interim measure, to
provide sanitary facilities to the said squatters. Accordingly following
directions were issued:-
(1) Cost for the project shall be borne in equal proportion by the
State of West Bengal and the Union of India, through
railway administration.
(2) The State Government authorities, authorities of the railway
administration as also the Calcutta Municipal Corporation
shall see to it that no further infiltration takes place.
(3) After the aforementioned project is completed by the State
Government Calcutta Municipal Corporation would see the
proper sanitation is maintained.
In this appeal, the appellants contend that in view of the fact
that there are lawful orders to evict the said squatters from the railway
property, the High Court ought to have directed the eviction of the
squatters rather than providing them with further benefits which
would only make them disobey the order of eviction. The appellants
urge that instead of the impugned directions, the High Court ought to
have directed the State Government to provide the Railways necessary
police help to evict the illegal squatters whose occupation on the
railway land is causing serious problems to the railways in
maintaining its services as also causing danger to the passengers and
goods carried by the railways, apart from the problem of pollution as
contended in the writ petition.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and we notice
that the impugned order itself states that the same shall not come in
the way of the implementation of the eviction order already passed. If
that be so, we find no reason why the railways or for that matter State
of West Bengal should be directed to provide sanitary facilities even
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
as an interim measure. We see from the records that subsequent to the
impugned order which is of 18.6.1999, on 14.12.2001 the High Court
has held that the competent authorities having passed eviction order
against these squatters the State Government with the railway
administration and the Calcutta Municipal Corporation should see that
all these orders are complied within one month of the passing of the
said order. It seems no steps are yet taken to comply with the order of
eviction. We also notice on 18.1.2002 an application was filed on
behalf of Ballygunj-Tollygung Rail Colony Sangram Committee
seeking an extension of time by six months to persons residing in the
said railway property (squatters) to vacate the same. We also notice
even though the said application contained a prayer for rehabilitation
of the said squatters, the same was given up and the prayer was
confined only to the extension of time to vacate the railway property.
The High Court taking note of certain difficulties that was there at that
point of time for these squatters to vacate immediately, extended the
time to vacate the area in question by 30th of April, 2002, subject to
the condition that the concerned persons filed an undertaking to the
Court committing themselves to vacate the area in question by 30th
April, 2002. Such undertaking was to be filed within 10 days of the
date of the said order of the High Court. The court also directed in
default of filing of undertaking, the order of extension will stand
cancelled. The said order of the High Court is made mandatory and
peremptory. But we are told that till this day there has been no
compliance of that order. It is possible because of the pendency of
these petitions further steps might not have been taken by the High
Court.
Be that as it may, in view of the subsequent orders of the High
Court dated 14.12.2001 and 18.1.2002 wherein there are clear cut
directions for evicting the illegal squatters in the railway property in
question, we think the impugned order has become infructuous.
We, however, make it clear that the High Court should now
take such steps as is necessary to see that the orders of eviction passed
by the competent authorities and also the directions given by it as per
orders dated 14.12.2001 and 18.1.2003 are given effect to at the
earliest.
With the said observations, these appeals stand disposed of.