When the post-Godhra riots broke out, Sadiq Pathan and his family, the only Muslims in this village, fled. On their return, they found the house razed, the plot cleared of bamboo and teak. On it stood three pre-fab classrooms and a toilet, an extension of the adjacent government primary school. Ever since, 75-year-old Pathan has been trying to get back his ancestral property. Even a court order in his favour hasn’t helped. Ranged against him are the school authorities, who say he was an encroacher, and the villagers who say they are prepared to pool money to appeal the order. But Pathan plods on. He now lives in Chalamali, some 30 km away and has found a job there as a muezzin. ‘‘This is the land of my ancestors. How can I let go of it so easily?’’ he asks. ‘‘If villagers want to grab my land, I should be given another plot elsewhere.’’ Pathan first took his case to the local authorities who directed him to the courts. The district court ordered that the status quo before the riots broke out be maintained: Pathan must be allowed to have possession of the plot on which his house stood till the case was disposed. The Kwant taluka development officer (TDO) went in appeal to a fast-track court, claiming that the land belonged to the government. The TDO said Pathan was an encroacher. In April this year, the fast-track court rejected the appeal. Again the authorities were told to maintain status quo as of 2002. But the school extension still stands on Pathan’s land. A new school gate that has been put up opens on to his land. ‘‘It was my grandmother who had donated land for the village school,’’ he says. ‘‘Despite that the villagers want to take away the land where my house stood.’’ Head teacher Banasingh Rathwa, who seems to be leading the fight against Pathan, says the land belongs to the panchayat. Teacher Kalubhai, too, argues for keeping the extension where it stands. ‘‘We are prepared to fight it out for the sake of our children’s education,’’ he says. Pathan counters their claims with a clutch of revenue department receipts in his name. ‘‘Why is it that the villagers did not object in the decades we’ve lived there?’’ he asks. ‘‘Was it only after 2002 that they remember? Despite the court order in my favour, they are persisting.’’ Pathan had written to the Governor, Chief Minister and other district officials. The Governor’s office wrote back on July 7 that the principal secretary in the revenue department should take appropriate action. Told of Pathan’s plight, Vadodara district development officer (DDO) M Tennaresan said he would direct education department officials to conduct a spot check. ‘‘If the court order is in his favour, and if all proofs are in order, the encroachment will be removed,’’ the DDO said. Pathan is still waiting.
