In 1976, a 2,500-square-foot plot of land was granted to a Project-Affected Person (PAP). After nearly four decades, a complaint emerged, alleging a violation of the allocation's terms, which mandated the construction of a dwelling on the land within a year. As a result of this alleged non-compliance with the stipulated condition, the state authorities took the decision to cancel the land allotment. This move has ignited a debate surrounding the legality and fairness of revoking an allocation made many years ago, raising questions about the rights and responsibilities of land beneficiaries in long-standing cases of land distribution.
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has declared that the state cannot impose "draconian" and "unreasonable" conditions on project-affected persons (PAPs) when allotting alternative land for housing on humanitarian grounds. The court's decision, delivered on Monday, marks the reversal of a 2019 order that cancelled an allotment due to non-compliance.
The case revolved around a 2,500-square-foot plot of land allocated to a PAP back in 1976. Nearly four decades later, a complaint was lodged, alleging a failure to meet the original allotment condition, which mandated the construction of a house within one year. As a result of this complaint, the state authorities revoked the land allocation.
The Bombay High Court, denouncing this act as "discriminatory, unjust, and arbitrary," granted relief to Manik Deokar, a 78-year-old farmer hailing from Solapur. The court expressed concerns that imposing such conditions would essentially result in a "coercive taking away of the alternate land" and undermine the intended benefit of rehabilitation for PAPs.
Deokar's case also included his assertion of the need for an additional 1,500 square feet of land. He argued that his family consisted of 15 members and that the initial 2,500 square feet would not be sufficient to construct a house large enough for all of them. The High Court accepted his claim, declaring that he was entitled to a total of 8,000 square feet of land. Of this, 4,000 square feet had already been allotted in 1996. The court has now directed the state to allocate the additional 1,500 square feet within a period of 12 weeks.
This ruling serves as an important legal precedent, upholding the rights of project-affected persons and ensuring that their rehabilitation is carried out in a fair and just manner. It underscores the need for authorities to consider the specific circumstances and needs of PAPs when making land allocations, rather than imposing rigid conditions that may hinder their resettlement and housing efforts.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
