### Unauthorised Occupants on Railway Land are Ineligible for MUTP Rehabilitation without Project-Affected Status

A batch of 25 writ petitions was filed by occupants of structures situated on Western Railway land in Malad (East), Mumbai

The Petitioners claimed to have occupied these premises since 1980

On August 29, 2022, the Estate Officer issued show-cause notices under Section 5A(2) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (“the Act”), alleging unauthorized occupation

The Petitioners replied on October 13, 2023, claiming protection and rehabilitation under the Government Resolution (GR) dated December 12, 2000, and the MUTP project

On January 23, 2025, the Estate Officer passed eviction orders directing the Petitioners to vacate within 15 days

An appeal to the City Civil Court was dismissed as non-maintainable on May 6, 2025

Whether the Petitioners qualify as Project Affected Persons (PAP) entitled to rehabilitation under the Government Resolution dated December 12, 2000

Whether the Railway Authorities followed the due process of law as mandated by the Supreme Court in Utran Se Besthan Railway Jhopadpatti Vikas Mandal v. Govt. of India

The court applied Section 2(e) (defining public premises), Section 2(g) (defining unauthorized occupation), and Section 5A (power to remove unauthorized constructions) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971

It interpreted the eligibility criteria for Resettlement and Rehabilitation (R&R) under the Government Resolution dated December 12, 2000, which requires occupants to be enumerated during a baseline survey or be directly affected by a specific project

Additionally, the court relied on the procedural mandates for eviction established in Utran Se Besthan Railway Jhopadpatti Vikas Mandal v. Government of India

and the humanitarian guidelines for eviction set forth in Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan

The Court found that the Petitioners failed to produce any evidence demonstrating that their structures were authorized or that they were enumerated in the baseline survey for the MUTP project, which is a prerequisite for PAP status under the 2000 GR

Crucially, the Petitioners admitted in their own representations that their structures were located beyond 10 meters from the 6th Railway Line, meaning they were not physically affected by the project expansion

Regarding procedural fairness, the Court noted that the Estate Officer issued formal Show Cause Notices and provided an opportunity for hearing, thereby complying with the "due process" requirements of the Act and the Utran Se Besthan precedent

Although the Petitioners were found to be unauthorized occupants, the Court observed that the Railways bore some responsibility for allowing the long-term occupation, necessitated a humanitarian approach to the timeline for eviction

However, based on humanitarian grounds, the Court issued the following directions: (a) Petitioners are granted 60 days to vacate the premises; (b) if they fail to do so, Western Railways may use the local police for forceful dispossession

(c) the Collector must record the identity of the occupants before eviction to preserve their data for any future eligibility under general State schemes

and (d) the Authorities are directed to take an independent decision on any future rehabilitation applications without the Court expressing a view on their merits

Rule discharged