Threatening with contempt for non-compliance with its order, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday directed slum-dwellers in Jogeshwari (East) to vacate their premises by 5pm on Wednesday, as per the undertaking given to the court last week.
A division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale, last week, had refused to stay demolition of slums spread over 12,000 square metres observing that this would not only delay the completion of the rehab but will also prejudice the others in the same slum who have actually vacated and are presently out on transit rent.
The 11 slum dwellers, whose eligibility is yet to be decided, had approached the HC challenging the demolition. However, they had agreed to accept six months’ advance transit rent offered by the developer, Gyan SP LLP, and gave an undertaking that they would vacate the premises.
“Political interference” prevented demolition
During the hearing on Tuesday, senior advocate Navroz Seervai and advocate Cherag Balsara, counsels for the developer, informed the court that there was some “political interference” and that the demolition could not take place.
Irked, the bench warned that it would initiate contempt proceedings against all concerned who fail to comply with its orders.
“There is complete non-compliance of our order of 15th June 2023. Mr Seervai says there was some ‘political interference’. Mr Seervai says this is unusual. It is not. We are not allowing any politician at any level, and we mean at any level, to interfere with orders of this Court,” the bench said.
“Any attempt to obstruct the eviction of these Petitioners (slum dwellers) is going to be viewed, treated and dealt with as an interference with the administration of justice, i.e., as contempt of court, civil or criminal. It does not matter to us in the least against whom that notice is required to be issued.”
Security personnel to be deployed at the site
The HC has asked the high court receiver to oversee the demolition and directed Jogeshwari Police Station to deploy “sufficient number of male and female personnel” at the site.
“If there is non-compliance we will proceed against the police authorities,” the bench added.
Advocate Makrand Raut, appearing for the slum dwellers, informed the court that they are “hunting” for alternative premises.
“They might as well be hunting for the snark; it will be about as effective. This hunt has nothing to do with orders of the Court. There was an undertaking. It will be followed,” said the judges while giving them time till 5pm on Wednesday to vacate. “If they do not vacate the premises on their own they will be forcibly evicted,” it added.
Seervai pointed out that despite their statement to the court, the petitioners had refused to accept the rent cheques. The cheque payments were ₹9,000 per month for six months, i.e., ₹54,000 per person.
Raut disputed the amount. However, the bench noted that the amount was reckoned as per the SRA requirements.
“It is open to the Petitioners not to accept the amount. Nonetheless, they have to go. They therefore have the choice of leaving with ₹54,000 each, i.e., per head or family or without it. They do not have the choice of continuing on site,” the bench said.
The HC has asked the SRA not to take any steps to decide eligibility of these petitioners until they clear the site.
