SBI Term Loan: RLLR: 8.15 | 7.25% - 8.45%
Canara Bank: RLLR: 8 | 7.15% - 10%
ICICI Bank: RLLR: -- | 8.5% - 9.65%
Punjab & Sind Bank: RLLR: 7.3 | 7.3% - 10.7%
Bank of Baroda: RLLR: 7.9 | 7.2% - 8.95%
Federal Bank: RLLR: -- | 8.75% - 10%
IndusInd Bank: RLLR: -- | 7.5% - 9.75%
Bank of Maharashtra: RLLR: 8.05 | 7.1% - 9.15%
Yes Bank: RLLR: -- | 7.4% - 10.54%
Karur Vysya Bank: RLLR: 8.8 | 8.5% - 10.65%

Uttarakhand High Court halts demolition of Dehradun slum homes, citing breach of natural justice

#Law & Policy#India#Uttarakhand
Synopsis

In a recent development, the Uttarakhand High Court intervened to stop the demolition of slum dwellings in Dehradun's Vikas Nagar area. The court observed that the demolition notices issued to residents violated principles of natural justice, as they were served without prior hearings or verification of property ownership. The affected residents, many from marginalized communities, claimed legitimate ownership supported by official documents. The court has stayed the demolitions until further orders and has scheduled the next hearing for early next month.

Earlier this week, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a stay on the demolition of slum dwellings in Dehradun's Vikas Nagar area, stating that the notices served to residents contravened the principles of natural justice. A division bench comprising Chief Justice G Narendar and Justice Ashish Naithani took up the matter urgently, responding to a public interest litigation filed by residents.


The petitioners, inhabitants of various villages within Vikas Nagar, reported receiving demolition notices on April 5. These notices alleged that their homes were constructed on water bodies, seasonal streams, and drains. However, the residents contended that the administration issued these notices without verifying property details or providing an opportunity for them to present their case. Many of the affected individuals are from economically disadvantaged backgrounds and lack formal education, making them particularly vulnerable to such administrative actions.

The petition further asserted that numerous residents possess valid property documents confirming their ownership and that their homes are situated away from any water bodies or streams. Satellite imagery submitted to the court corroborated these claims, showing that the dwellings in question are not located near the alleged water bodies. The residents have committed to submitting their property documents to the court by April 15.

Recognizing the gravity of the situation, the High Court emphasized the necessity of adhering to due process before undertaking such demolitions. The bench has stayed the demolition activities until further notice and scheduled the next hearing for early next month.

As urban areas expand and infrastructure projects become more prevalent, authorities must ensure that actions taken do not disproportionately impact vulnerable populations without due process. The upcoming hearing will be pivotal in determining the course of action that balances development goals with the rights and livelihoods of the affected residents.

Discussion

Have something to say? Post your comment