Unauthorised Occupants on Railway Land are Ineligible for Rehabilitation Absent Evidence of Project-Affected Status

The Petitioners, a group of 25 individuals residing in various chawls at Dhobi Ghat, Malad (East), Mumbai, occupied structures on land belonging to the Western Railways

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, for the removal of unauthorized structures

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

The Petitioners unsuccessfully appealed to the City Civil Court, which dismissed the appeals as non-maintainable on May 6, 2025

The Petitioners subsequently approached the High Court, claiming protection under a Government Resolution (GR) dated December 12, 2000, asserting they were "Project Affected Persons" (PAP) under the Mumbai Urban Transport Project (MUTP)

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

2. Whether the eviction orders passed by the Estate Officer followed the due procedure of law as mandated by the Supreme Court in *Utran Se Besthan Railway Jhopadpatti Vikas Mandal v. Government of India*

The Court applied the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, specifically Section 2(g) defining "unauthorised occupation"

and Section 5A(2) regarding the removal of unauthorized structures

It relied on the Government Resolution dated December 12, 2000, which sets Phase I/II MUTP eligibility criteria for squatters based on a baseline survey cut-off date

Furthermore, the court referred to the Supreme Court’s dictum in *Utran Se Besthan Railway Jhopadpatti Vikas Mandal v. Govt. of India* (2021) regarding the Railway’s duty to follow the Public Premises Act or provide support where the authority's negligence contributed to the occupation

and *Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Nawab Khan Gulab Khan* (1997) regarding the humanitarian aspects of evicting long-term encroachers

The Court observed that the Petitioners admitted the structures were unauthorized and situated on Railway land

Regarding the claim for rehabilitation, the Court found that the Petitioners failed to produce evidence showing their structures were affected by the MUTP or situated within 10 meters of the 6th Railway Line

In fact, the Petitioners’ own representations admitted the structures were beyond the 10-meter project zone, thus disqualifying them from PAP status under the 2000 GR

Addressing procedural fairness, the Court noted that unlike the precedent in *Utran Se Besthan*, the Railways here followed the statutory mechanism of the 1971 Act by issuing Show Cause Notices and providing a hearing

Consequently, the eviction was deemed legally sound.

However, acknowledging the Petitioners’ long-term occupancy and the Railways' historical failure to protect the land, the Court held the Railways partially responsible for the situation, necessitating a humane transition period

However, the Court issued the following directions: (a) Petitioners are granted 60 days to vacate the premises

(b) failing voluntary vacation, the Railways may use police force for demolition

(c) the Collector must record the identities/profiles of the occupants before eviction to preserve their potential eligibility for any other general state rehabilitation schemes

and (d) any such rehabilitation is subject to independent verification of eligibility and will not grant a right to alternative accommodation at the same site

Rule was discharged with no order as to costs