SC Direct Prayagraj Development Authority to pay 10 Lakh Compensation in Bulldoze Action Case of Year 2021 | This is inhuman ... Supreme Court reprimanded bulldozer action in Prayagraj, order for compensation of 10-10 lakhs
Prayagraj News: The Supreme Court on Tuesday reprimanded the Prayagraj Development Authority (PDA). In 2021, the court termed the action of demolishing the house illegal and inhuman. The court said that such action has violated the rights of the people and it is against the Constitution.
Violation of Right to Shelter ‘
Justice Abhay S. A bench of Oka and Justice Ujjwal Bhuiyan said that the demolition of someone’s house from bulldozers is against the law. He said, “There is also something called ‘Right to Shelter’ (Right to Housing) in the country, proper procedure should be followed.”
5 houses were dropped as gangster’s land
In 2021, the Prayagraj administration had dropped five houses as the property of gangster Atik Ahmed. The owners of these houses were a lawyer, a professor and three others. Later it was learned that these properties were not associated with Atik Ahmed. The victims had filed a petition in the High Court, but it was rejected by the High Court.
Supreme Court ordered 10-10 compensation
The Supreme Court has ordered the PDA to give compensation of Rs 10 lakh within six weeks, whose houses were dropped. The court said that the government should accept its mistake and protect the rights of citizens.
Notice given in the day, bulldozer at night
The victims told the court that they were given notice on the night of 6 March 2021, but wrote the date of March 1 on it. The next day, that is, on March 7, their houses were dropped. The Supreme Court made strict comments on this and said that the administration has violated the rules.
Supreme Court mentioned another incident
During the hearing, Justice Ujjwal Bhuiyan mentioned an incident in Ambedkar Nagar, UP. He said, “A picture came out in which the bulldozer was breaking the huts and an 8 -year -old girl was running away with her books. This was a shocking scene.”
Why was the petition in the High Court rejected?
The Allahabad High Court had dismissed the petition in this case and said that the land on which the house was built was ‘Nazul land’, that is, government land. The lease in 1906 ended in 1996. The victims had applied for free-holding the land, which was rejected in 2015 and 2019.
Supreme Court raises questions on administration
The Supreme Court turned down the state government’s argument that the action was legal. Justice Oka asked, “If someone was living illegally on government land, why the notice was not given properly? It is directly unjust and tyrannical action.”
This decision of the Supreme Court has again sparked debate on the bulldozer policy of the administration. Now it has to be seen how the government implements this decision and will such action be controlled in future.