The Supreme Court recently addressed the complex issue of 39 families occupying flats in SAS Nagar, Mohali, originally intended for victims of the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. These families have been living in the flats for almost 40 years, yet they do not possess the “Red Cards” which are crucial to verifying their status as genuine victims of the riots. The issue emerged after the Punjab authorities asserted that these families had unlawfully occupied the flats, while the petitioners contended that they were victims of the riots who had been displaced from Jahangir Puri, Delhi, during the violence.
Background of the Case
The flats in question were intended for families that were displaced during the 1984 riots. However, the families occupying them have not been recognized as legitimate riot victims under the government’s criteria. The Punjab authorities claim that the families have trespassed into the premises and have been in unlawful possession for several decades. In contrast, the families argue that they were granted possession of the flats by local MLAs at the time of the riots.
The case reached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which issued an order in 2017, directing the families to file a comprehensive response to a public notice asking them to vacate the premises. Despite this, the families continued to stay in the flats. In 2018, the Supreme Court intervened by maintaining the status quo and preventing the authorities from evicting the families.
Supreme Court’s Current Order
When the case was brought before the Supreme Court again, Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan acknowledged the “peculiar problem” faced by the petitioners. On one hand, they did not have the legal right to remain in the flats, but on the other hand, they had been residing there for nearly 40 years. The Court noted that local MLAs had played a role in granting them possession at the time of the riots.
The Court directed the Punjab authorities to explore the possibility of providing alternative accommodation for the affected families. In light of the long-standing nature of their residence, the Court also suggested that the authorities consider regularizing the occupation of the flats under specific terms and conditions. This could include outright sale of the flats at a reasonable price.
Moreover, the Court questioned whether there were feasible options to accommodate these families in other premises within Mohali or nearby areas. The Court highlighted the need to balance the claims of these long-term residents with the availability of housing for other economically weaker sections of society.
Background on the Rehabilitation Scheme
The Court also referred to a rehabilitation scheme introduced by the government in 2018, which offered small booths for relocation. However, the Court noted that only three families had applied for this scheme, indicating a lack of interest in the proposed relocation option. This factor raised questions about the effectiveness of the scheme in addressing the housing needs of the families.
Legal and Social Implications
The case underscores the challenges of balancing legal rights, historical injustices, and the practicalities of long-term occupation. While the families may not have had legal entitlement to the flats, their long tenure in the properties complicates the eviction process. The Supreme Court’s approach highlights the need for a humane and pragmatic solution, considering both legal formalities and the realities faced by the affected families.
The ruling is significant in setting a precedent for how long-standing occupants of government properties should be treated, particularly when issues of historical injustice and state responsibility are involved.
Case Details: Harbhajan Singh (Dead) & Ors v. The State of Punjab & Ors., SLP (C) 9948/2018.
Lawcutor 