The Bombay High Court has raised concern over the handling of eviction notices by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), stressing the need for a more compassionate approach towards slum dwellers' welfare. Amidst concerns over short eviction notices issued after two decades of promises for "permanent alternate accommodation," the court directed the Apex Grievance Redressal Committee to promptly review and potentially stay the eviction orders. The case, concerning slum dwellers near Worli Dairy in Mumbai, reiterated the importance of the Slum Act's welfare intent. The court's rebuke extended to the AGRC's conduct, emphasizing the importance of humanity over monetary concerns in such matters. The intervention underscores the court's commitment to protecting vulnerable communities' rights and well-being.
The Bombay High Court has raised concerns over the Slum Rehabilitation Authority's (SRA) handling of eviction notices for original slum dwellers and emphasized the need for a more humane approach to the welfare of families. The court expressed disapproval of the SRA's decision to issue short notices, especially after nearly two decades of promising "permanent alternate accommodation" to the slum residents. The Apex Grievance Redressal Committee (AGRC) was directed to convene promptly and decide on a stay for the eviction order, with the court emphasizing the importance of considering the well-being of the affected families.
The case involved slum dwellers near Worli Dairy in Mumbai who were served a 7-day vacation notice by the SRA. The residents sought intervention from the High Court against this eviction notice. The court criticized the SRA's approach, reminding statutory authorities that the Slum Act is a welfare legislation intended for the benefit of slum dwellers, not just builders.
The court's displeasure extended to the AGRC's conduct, and it urged the committee to be more attentive to such issues. The court highlighted the disturbing aspect of how the SRA, entrusted with the welfare of slum dwellers, could decide after such a prolonged period that a mere seven days is sufficient to uproot entire families. The judges expressed that the last thing they want is for money to supersede the concerns and humanity of these individuals.
The background of the case involved slum dwellers being initially informed that their premises were designated as "Permanent Alternate Accommodation." However, nearly two decades later, on the developer's application, the Letter of Intent was amended, deeming the occupied buildings as a transit camp and requiring them to be pulled down for the project's completion.
The court expressed extreme displeasure at the AGRC's unavailability during the appeals filed by slum dwellers. The judges also issued a direction applicable to all authorities, stating that eviction notices should not mention only hours, emphasizing the need for a more considerate approach in such matters.
In conclusion, the Bombay High Court's intervention in the slum eviction case reflects a commitment to safeguarding the rights and well-being of vulnerable communities, emphasizing the importance of a compassionate and humane approach by statutory authorities entrusted with such responsibilities.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
