Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

47] In Sahyadri Punarvasan Gaothan Vikas Sanstha vs. Pandharpur Municipal Council23, Division Bench of this Court was concerned with the grievances of persons displaced by the Kanhar Dam in Satara District in the matter of proper implementation of the resettlement programme. This court observed that it was unfortunate that whenever irrigation projects are undertaken in the name of larger public good, people residing in remote villages are displaced. Not only they get thrown out from the areas where they are residing for decades together, but upon shifting, minimum and basic amenities are also not guaranteed to them. It is a common grievance of the people that while residing decades together, with State assistance and most of the time on their own, they establish schools, play grounds, cremation grounds etc.. However, everything is gone the moment the villages are submerged. Such people are then shifted at far off places. In the name of resettlement and rehabilitation, virtually nothing is provided. This is the grievance on most occasions. People get thrown 23 2005(3) Bom.C.R. 210 44 of 74 skc 45 JUDGMENT-WP-6620-12-GROUP MATTER out and displaced physically, mentally and socially. Communities which are residing together for decades are forced to adjust with totally different living conditions. This has a deleterious effect upon all sections and stratas of society, but more particularly upon women and children. The Division Bench, after reference to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Samata Vs. State of A.P24., has held that right to reputation, right to privacy, right to equal opportunities of personal, social, community growth and development are facets of the right to life and liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution. The mandate is clear. Right to live has to be made meaningful, purposeful and relevant. It is not as if only the urban population is entitled to the benefit of basic amenities. It is a misnomer and the misconception when we proceed on the basis that the people living in the villages do not require toilets, open spaces, markets, burial grounds, roads, electricity and water supply. Even after 57 years of independence, we are unable to provide these basic amenities. The response of State is not at all encouraging. It is unfortunate that absolutely no attention is paid to these aspects when implementing and undertaking public project. The courts including the Hon'ble Supreme Court has highlighted the matter of total rehabilitation. In fact, the need of hour is to first habitate and then commence the work. However, neither this nor rehabilitation has been done sincerely and honestly. Funds are allocated but rarely disbursed. If disbursed, there is no account of actual expenditure. Although expended on paper, at site, nothing is visible. It is time that rehabilitation is done sincerely, honestly and diligently.