Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: basic amenities in Vora Zakirhusain Valibhai vs State Of Gujarat on 20 February, 2021Matching Fragments
4. The Petitioners have been residing in Sector 13/14 Gokulpura Slums since last several years. That since late 80's and early 90's people from villages and nomadic tribes started coming to Gandhinagar to find work and started living in huts. That the petitioners built their huts in Sector 13/14 in Gandhinagar and found domestic and labour work to eke out their livelihoods. That on 27.11.2010 the Respondent authorities demolished around 352 slums in Sector 13/14 despite of stay granted by the High Court and thereafter as the slum dwellers preferred SCA No. 15216 of 2010 the Respondents provided them alternative place where the petitioners built their slums and are residing there at present. The List prepared on 27.11.2010 of 352 slum dwellers displaced/removed from original place and shifted to the present land was prepared by the Deputy Engineer, Capital Project Division, Gandhinagar and the Mamalatdar, Gandhinagar (Pg 182209). The petitioners were displaced despite of stay granted by this Hon'ble Court vide its order dt. 09.08.2010 in SCA No. 10786 of 2009 (Pg178). This Hon'ble Court passed several interim orders in SCA N. 15216 of 2010 directing the respondents to provide for all basic amenities and the petitioners were allotted plots which were numbered, electricity connection as well as water facilities and toilets were provided by the Respondent Authorities ( Pg217). The Petitioners submits that the petitioners have been residing in the slums prior to 2010 however they were displaced from their original slums and given the said area to construct and live because of the petition filed in this Hon'ble Court being SCA No. 15216 of 2010. That therefore the respondents by showing the Google earth images of 2003 onwards to indicate that the petitioners have not been living in this area is misplaced and factually incorrect. Further the List prepared by the authority at Pg182 is conclusive proof to indicate that all the petitioners have been living in slums prior to 1.12.2010 (which is the cut of date to become eligible slum dweller for alternative accommodation in GR dt. 18.07.2013). That the Google Earth images annexed by the Respondents are inaccurate and at the top where years are mentioned it shows "Write a description for your Map" and above that years are mentioned by typing it on the screen. The Petitioners seriously dispute the map of 2012 as the petitioners have checked on Google Earth and it does not have the image of the year 2012. The Petitioner have annexed the map of the area where the petitioners were staying prior to 27.11.2010 and the respondents themselves shifted the petitioners to the present site where they have been living since last 10 years.
(a) What the consequences of eviction might be?
(b) Whether the Corporation/Collector/authority could help in alleviating those dire consequences?
(c) Whether it is possible to redevelop the area occupied by the slum dwellers considering the policies and schemes of the State and Central Government?
(d) Whether it is possible to rehabilitate and accommodate the slum dwellers at any other location near to their workplace after providing them with basic amenities?
II. The Petitioners submits that if the Respondent authority wants to utilize the said land then the petitioners may be provided alternative area and be permitted to make their huts and provide all basic amenities required to live life with dignity. They may provide Electricity, Water, toilets, streetlights etc and transportation facilities and at least 25 sq mtrs plot per family as an interim measure and ultimately include them for permanent residence as per the GR dt. 13.07.2013 and relax the eligibility criteria and allot flats to all those petitioners who have been residing in slums prior to 1.12.2010.
(k) Whether it is possible to rehabilitate and accommodate the slum dwellers at any other location near to their workplace after providing them with basic amenities?
(l) Whether it is possible to render the Slums relatively safe and conducive for health?
(m) Whether the Corporation/Collector/authority had any obligations to the slum dwellers in the prevailing circumstances?