Sabarmati Ashram redevelopment: Civic body says removal of encroachers necessary to keep project timeline on track

The AMC, in its affidavit, filed through deputy estate officer Hitendra Makwana, has submitted that “on the ground of larger public interest,” AMC’s order for eviction “is just and proper and does not call for any interference” from the Court.

“It is submitted that in view of the recent development the execution and implementation of the above referred TP road is more essential in the interest of the public at large and in the interest of ‘Gandhi Ashram Memorial and Precinct Development Project’… It is submitted that the competent authority has decided to develop Gandhi Ashram and its surrounding land which is forming part of the project in question with a noble aim for promoting and educating the people in the philosophy, value and teachings of Gandhiji, who is the father of the nation. To achieve the above-referred noble goal, this mammoth project has been taken up by the state authority…

“It is submitted that the work of development of Gandhi Ashram under the above-referred project is underway. It is submitted that for the purpose of further continuation of the project in question, it is essential to discontinue the traffic of Ashram road touching to the existing Ashram as the said land of existing Ashram road as on today would be needed for development of the Ashram as per the project in question… It would become clear that for the purpose of smooth implementation of the project in question and with a view to undertake further work so as to complete the project in question, the execution and implementation of the TP road in question is absolutely essential and urgent. It would not be out of place to mention here that if the work of project in question is not undertaken as per the schedule, it may affect the financial assistance from the Central government which ultimately result into delaying the project in question or may affect the project itself, which is of National Importance,” said the civic body.

Submitting that owing to the illegal slum dwellings, the “entire implementation” of the TP road was stalled, the AMC stated that the dwellers are not entitled to the benefits of rehabilitation and resettlement policy for slum dwellers of 2010 as the petitioners could not submit the requisite documents of their occupation on or before the cut-off date as is prescribed under the policy.

Fifty-two dwellers had moved a petition before the Gujarat HC on April 13 seeking that their cases be considered for rehabilitation and resettlement policy of the state government.

Advocate Anand Yagnik, appearing on behalf of the petitioners before the Court of Justice Niral Mehta, submitted that apart from the slum rehabilitation policy of 2010, there is also scope that the petitioners be considered for rehabilitation policy made specifically for rehabilitation and resettlement of Ashram residents. It was also pointed out that the said TP road was sanctioned in 1982 but has not been implemented till date.

Advocate General Kamal Trivedi, appearing on behalf of the AMC, informed the Court that the encroachers were removed in 2006 following Gujarat HC orders and while the authorities “don’t have any objection against rehabilitation, the package which is being contemplated (by the petitioners), is not available (to them).”

Yagnik argued that “an encroacher or a beggar doesn’t have a right to choice but a benevolent state has a right to offer (rehabilitation).”

Yagnik informed the Court that he wishes to file a reply to the AMC’s affidavit. The Court has now kept the matter for April 24.

The Gujarat HC in February this year had disposed of a petition moved by 55 of these slum dwellers after the state government’s assurance that any action against them would be taken “in accordance with law by following due procedures.” The authorities at the time had informed the Court that the dwellers had made representations before the authorities requesting that they be granted the benefits under the Regulation for the Rehabilitation and Redevelopment of the Slum, 2010, and that the authorities will consider such representations in accordance with the law.