* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Writ Petition (Civil) No. 26212010 Ram Chander & Ors. . . . .Petitioners Through Mohd. Mannan, Advocate. VERSUS Union of India & Ors. Respondents Through Mr. Roshan Lal Goel, Advocate for respondent No. 1. Ms. Maninder Acharya, Advocate for Respondent No. 2. Mrs. Usha Saxena, Advocate for Respondent No. 4. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA ORDER % 23.02.2011 The petitioners 53 in numbers have filed the present writ petition for the following reliefs:- "(a) Issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to rehabilitate cum relocate the aforesaid slum dwellers as per Government Scheme of rehabilitation cum relocation; (a) And further be pleased to pass award a sum of rupees fifty thousand as compensation to each of the petitioner as loss caused in demolition, in the interest of justice. wPc 2632/2010 Page 1 of 5 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified (b) Issue such other appropriate writ, order or directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice." 2. The contention of the petitioners is that they were living in Khokhas cum jhuggies which were being used for residence cum shops. These have been demolished and removed and they are in terms of the rehabilitation policy of the Government formulated in the year 2000 and Master Plan of Delhi 2021,entitled to alternative allotment as they have been deprived of right to life and livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution. 3. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, which had carried out the demolition have filed counter affidavit. It is stated that to execute the work of remodeling and covering of Titarpur drain from Najafgarh Road to Najafgarh Drain, a joint survey was conducted to identify encroachments. The survey report has been closed. Thereafter action for removal, of encroachment was fixed from 5th March, 2010 to 8th March, 2010. The demolition was undertaken and encroachments in the form of pucca and'kacha structures were removed. Notice board WPC2632/2010 Page2of5 Lb was fixed by the said respondent at two places 15 days before the demolition activity was undertaken. Alongwith the counter affidavit, photograph of the two notices have been enclosed. It has been stated that the petitioners are not entitled to any rehabilitation or compensation as they had encroached upon government land. 4. Slum & JJ Department now known as Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board has filed two affidavits. In the first affidavit it is stated the said board is the implementing agency for the eligible jhuggie jhopri dwellers found residing on encroached government land. In the second affidavit, it is stated that the earlier the cut off date for making Jhuggie jhopri dwellers eligible for allotment was 31st December, 1998 but now has been revised to 31st March, 2002. The name of jhuggie dweller should be in voters list on 31st March, 2002 and at the time of the survey before demolition is undertaken. These persons should have ration card prior to 31st March, 2002 or thereafter - upto the date of survey. Further, alternative allotment is made only against a residential jhuggie and in case the jhuggie is used for residential cum commercial purposes. No alternate allotment is made WPC 2632/2010 Page 3 of 5 where jhuggie is used for commercial purpose. It is stated that the priority list of 46 ii clusters has been approved for the purpose of relocation/rehabilitation and allotment but the name of ii Cluster namely Subzi Mandi, Raghubir Nagar does not exist in the priority list and no biometric survey of the area was carried out. 5. The petitioners along with the writ petition have enclosed photo copies of alleged voter, card and ration cards. They have also enclosed copies of some letters of protest with regard to demolition. One such letter is dated 19th December, 1989. The said letter is on behalf, of Pradhan, Fruits and Vegetables Sellers stating that they were selling fruits and vegetables in front of Bharat Ghar at. Nala. They had requested that they should be allotted shops in view of demolition. The said letter dated 19th December, 1989, as per the respondents indicates the nature of activity undertaken. However, in the present case we are concerned with the demolition undertaken in March, 2010. It is apparent that some survey was undertaken and demolition has been carried out. There is dispute whether the Jhuggies/ Khokhas were being 40 used for commercial purpose/residence. These are factual WPC 2632/2010 Page 4 of 5 matters/aspects and each case has to be examined on its own merit to VII/ H I determine and decide whether a particular case is covered by the policy mentioned by the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board in their affidavit. 6. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, it is directed that the petitioners should approach the respondent MçD along with a representation and copies of relevant documents. The representation will be examined in terms of the modified policy guidelines issued by the 'Govt. of NCT of Delhi. If required, the petitioners will produce original papers and documents for verification. In case the petitioners are found eligible as per the policy guidelines, it will be for the respondents to take action as per law. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition isdisposed of. SANJIV KHANNA, J. CHIEF JUSTICE February 23, 2011/kkb wc 2632/2010 Page 5 of 5