IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (C) NO. ___________ OF 2017
(UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)
IN THE MATTER OF:
1. Justice (Retd.) Panachand Jain
S/o. Late Shri Moolchandji Jain,
23, Mauj Colony,
Malviya Nagar,
Jaipur, Rajasthan
Email: justicepcj@gmail.com
2. Kuldip Nayar,
S/o. Late Gurbux Singh Nayar,
D-7/2, Vasant Vihar,
New Delhi
Email: kuldipnayar09@gmail.com
3. Aruna Roy,
W/o. Bunker Roy,
278, SFS DDA Flats,
Hauz Khas Apartments,
New Delhi – 110016
Email: arunaroy@gmail.com
4. Prof. Manoranjan Mohanty,
S/o. Bichitrananda Mohanty,
X-36, Sahvikas,
68, I.P. Extension,
Patparganj,
Delhi – 110092
Email: drmohantys@gmail.com
5. Annie Raja,
W/o. D. Raja,
309, Vithal Bhai Patel House,
Rafi Marg,
New Delhi – 110001
Email: anniedraja@gmail.com
6. Hannan Mollah
S/o. Late Abdul Latif Mollah,
208, Vithal Bhai Patel House,
Rafi Marg,
New Delhi – 110001
Email: mollah.hannan@gmail.com
7. Soumya Dutta,
S/o. Late Sushil Ranjan,
912, Regent Supertech Estate,
Vaishali, Sector – 9
Ghaziabad,
Uttar Pradesh
Email: soumyadutta.delhi@gmail.com
…. PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Through its Chief Secretary
Vallabh Bhawan
Bhopal
Madhya Pradesh
2. Narmada Valley Development Authority
Through its Chairman
Narmada Bhawan,
Tulsi Nagar
Bhopal
Madhya Pradesh
3. Narmada Control Authority
Through its Chairman
Secretary, Ministry of Water Resources
Shramshakti Bhawan,
Rafi Marg
New Delhi
4. Grievance Redressal Authority
Through its Chairman
59, Arera Hills,
2nd Floor, Narmada Bhawan,
Jail Road, Bhopal
Madhya Pradesh
… RESPONDENTS
WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ENFORCEMENT OF RIGHT TO LIFE AND LIBERTY AS GUARANTEED UNDER ARTICLE 21 OF CONSTITUTION OF THE PERSONS AND THEIR FAMILIES AFFECTED AND LIKELY TO BE AFFECTED DUE TO SUBMERGENCE WHICH WOULD OCCUR DUE TO IMPOUNDING OF THE SARDAR SAROVAR PROJECT DUE TO CLOSURE OF GATES
To,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India
and his Companion Justices of the
Supreme Court Of India, New Delhi
The humble petition of the petitioners above named:
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:
1. That the Present Writ Petition is being filed under Article 32 of the Constitution by concerned citizens to invoke the extraordinary powers of this Hon’ble Court, in the interest of justice to grant relief to thousands of tribals, farmers, women and children located in 192 villages of the State of Madhya Pradesh who are at the verge of being forcibly evicted for the impounding of the Sardar Sarovar Project at any time before 31.07.2017, without there being amenities and facilities available at the rehabilitation sites, including drinking water, proper shelter, primary medical and educational facilities, provisions for sewage and drainage and without many PAFs having received their entitlements.
This massive eviction by using force by the State Government, in such circumstances, will not only be in violation of the constitutional rights but, will also be a historical grave injustice done to thousands of these poor villagers.
These affected persons, in the process of development, are losing their villages and houses where they and their forefathers were living for generations. For the sacrifice which these people are making, they are atleast entitled to the minimum relief, namely, to treat them with human dignity, so that their family and children are not exposed to vagaries of the rainy season.
After acquainting with the complete facts, including the judgments of this Hon’ble Court and the order dated 08.02.2017, the Petitioners herein have consciously decided to approach this Hon’ble Court ex debito justiciae.
2. That the question which arises for consideration in the present Writ Petition is whether thousands of adivasis, farmers, women and children, who have not been provided resettlement and rehabilitation as per their entitlements under the NWDTA and judgments of this Court, in as much as the resettlement sites lack in basic facilities and amenities, can they be forcibly evicted by the State Government?
3. DETAILS OF THE PETITIONERS
3.1. Petitioner No. 1 is retired Judge of the Hon’ble High Court Rajasthan. His Aadhar No. 645309304419 and his annual income is about 23 Lakh/pa.
3.2. Petitioner No. 3 is a veteran Indian journalist, syndicated columnist, human right activist, author and ex-High Commissioner of India to United kingdom. He was also nominated as a Member of the Upper House of the Indian Parliament in 1997.
He is also the author of 15 books, including Beyond the Lines, Distant Neighbours: A Tale of the Subcontinent, India after Nehru, Wall at Wagah, India-Pakistan Relationship, The Judgement, The Martyr, Scoop and India House.
He has received Astor Award for Press Freedom in 2003 and Shaheed Niyogi Memorial Award for Lifetime Achievement in 2007.
His PAN No. is AADPN9212G and his annual income is about 6 Lakh/pa.
3.3. Petitioner No. 4 is renowned social activist who founded the Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS) along with Shankar Singh, Nikhil Dey and many others. She is known for her work for the vulnerable sections of the society.
She has been at the forefront of a number of campaigns for the rights of the poor and the marginalised. These have included, most prominently, the Right to Information, the Right to Work (the NREGA), and the Right to Food. More recently, she has been involved with the campaign for universal, non-contributory pension for unorganised sector workers as a member of the Pension Parishad and the NCPRI for the passage and enactment of the Whistleblower Protection Law and Grievance Redress Act.
In 2000, she received the Ramon Magsaysay Award for Community Leadership.[16] In 2010 she received the Lal Bahadur Shastri National Award for Excellence in Public Administration, Academia and Management. In 2011, she was named as one of the hundred most influential people in the world by Time Magazine.
Her PAN No. is ARTPR0544C and her annual income is about 1.5 Lakh/pa.
3.4. Petitioner No. 5 is a teacher, researcher and writer. A Political Scientist, China Scholar and Peace and Human Rights activist. He has written many books and research papers on theoretical and empirical dimensions of social movements, human rights, development studies and global transformation. After retiring from University of Delhi he has been with the Council for Social Development (CSD) and is the Editor of the CSD Journal, Social Change published by Sage. He is also Chairperson, Development Research Institute, Bhubaneswar, Honorary Fellow, Institute of Chinese Studies (ICS), Delhi and Fellow at Orfalea Centre for Global and International Studies, UC, Santa Barbara.
A Ph D. from UC, Berkeley, he was, till 2004, Professor of Political Science and Director, Developing Countries Research Centre DCRC) at the University of Delhi. He has had visiting assignments in several universities and research institutes in India and abroad including UC, Berkeley, IFES, Moscow, Oxford, Beijing, Copenhagen, Lagos, UC, Santa Barbara and New School, New York.
He has been a part of the founding and evolution of institutions such as the ICS, Delhi, the DCRC at Delhi University and Gabeshana Chakra and the Development Research Institute in Odisha. He has also been a part of the People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR), Delhi and the Pakistan-India People’s Forum for Peace and Democracy (PIPDPF) since their inception. He was part of the founding process of the Boao Forum for Asia in China and REGGEN, the Third World Sustainable Development Network in Brazil.
His Aadhar No 889070055053 and his annual income is about 9 Lakh/pa.
3.5. Petitioner No. 6 is veteran Politician and also General Secretary of National Federation of Indian Women.
Her EPIC No. Dl/01/002/201064 and her annual income is about 1 Lakh/pa.
3.6. Petitioner No. 7 is is an Indian politician. He was a member of Lok Sabha of India from the 7th Lok Sabha to the 14th Lok Sabha. He has all along represented the constituency Uluberia in Howrah district of West Bengal. He won the seat eight times in a row but till 2009 election. He is a member of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI (M)) political party. He became a member of the party when he was barely 16. He is currently a member of the Central Secretariat of the party. He was inducted into the politburo of the party at the 21st Party Congress in April 2015. He is also the General Secretary of the All India Kisan Sabha and a Joint Secretary of the All India Agricultural Workers’ Union.
His Passport No. is H4836413 and his annual income is about Rs. 6 Lakh/pa.
3.7. Petitioner No. 8 is an Environmentalist, Writer, Researcher and Scientist with Bharat Jan Vigyan and Convener of beyond Copenhagen Collective.
His PAN No. is AEMPD1806R and his annual income is about Rs. 3 Lakh/pa.
3A. The Petitioners do not have any personal interest, or private motive in filling the present Writ Petition. There are no civil, criminal, revenue or any litigation involving the Petitioners, which has or could have a legal nexus with the issues involved in the Present Writ Petition.
4. That owing to the urgency in the matter and also in view of the fact that the Sardar Sarovar Project is inter-state project, concerning which this Hon’ble Court has in past dealt with the issues regarding the Relief and Rehabiliation of the PAF’s of the Sardar Sarovar Project and has been pleased to pass several judgments and order on the similar issues, of which the interpretation may also be required to do complete justice in the matter, therefore, the Petitioners are approaching this Hon’ble Court under Art. 32 of the Constitution without approaching any of other authorities or the High Courts.
5. That most of the documents annexed with the present Writ Petition are in public domain and some of them have been obtained under the RTI Act.
6. BRIEF FACTS:
6.1. The Sardar Sarovar Project is an inter-state project. On dispute being raised by the States of MP, Maharashtra and Gujarat, it was referred to the Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal and an Award dated 12.12.1979 was passed. Two important stipulations in the Award are: that R&R should be pari pasu with construction and that the project affected families should be provided full R&R benefits six months before submergence. True Copy of the Narmada Water Disputes Tribunal Award dated 12.12.1979 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-1(Pages Nos. 23 to 59 ).
6.2. The provisions of the Award were examined by this Hon’ble Court in the Judgment reported at 2000 (10) SCC 644 titled as Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India and subsequently, in the Judgment reported at 2005(4) SCC 32 titled as Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India.
6.3. In the first judgment, this Hon’ble Court in view of the sacrosanct nature of the provisions of the Award, in particular, the pari passu principle, directed that R&R should be completed in advance before the construction at a specific dam height is approved. The difficulties, which will be faced by the affected persons, were sought to be addressed by holding that at the rehabilitation place, the oustees would be “better off”. Unfortunately, the pari passu principle of rehabilitation, which was envisaged in the Award as well as in the 2000 (10) SCC 644, was not complied with by the State and its agencies, due to which the R&R has lagged much behind the stipulated schedule.
6.4. That some of the oustees who were not given the entitlements as per the Award and the judgment at 2000 (10) SCC 644, approached this Hon’ble Court in 2002. After considering provisions of the Award and the judgment at 2000 (10) SCC 644, this Hon’ble Court recognized the need to complete rehabilitation 6 months before submergence by recognizing that as part of Article 21 of the Constitution, in Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India [2005 (4) SCC 332] Para 44 reads as follows:
“44. In terms of NWDT award, the irrigable lands and house sites were required to be made available to PAFs one year in advance of the submergence and requisite amenities were also to be provided. Further, the notices for vacation of the lands are to be given after completion of the R&R of PAFs on or before 31st December i.e. 6 months before actual submergence (likely on the 1st of July of the next year)”
6.5. That in another judgment ND Jayal v Union of India,(2004) 9 SCC 362 the principles of prior rehabilitation, rehabilitation being part of Article 21 and the importance of completion of R&R six months before submergence was again emphasized in Para 60, which reads as follows:
60. Rehabilitation is not only about providing just food, clothes or shelter. It is also about extending support to rebuild livelihood by ensuring necessary amenities of life. Rehabilitation of the oustees is a logical corollary of Article 21. The oustees should be in a better position to lead a decent life and earn livelihood in the rehabilitated locations. Thus observed this Court in Narmada Bachao Andolan case [(2000) 10 SCC 664]. The overarching projected benefits from the dam should not be counted as an alibi to deprive the fundamental rights of oustees. They should be rehabilitated as soon as they are uprooted. And none of them should be allowed to wait for rehabilitation. Rehabilitation should take place before six months of submergence. Such a time-limit was fixed by this Court in B.D. Sharma v. Union of India [1992 Supp (3) SCC 93] and this was reiterated in Narmada [(2000) 10 SCC 664]. This prior rehabilitation will create a sense of confidence among the oustees and they will be in a better position to start their life by acclimatizing themselves with the new environment.
6.6. That in the last order dated 08.02.2017 passed in IA Nos. 42,43,50-51 & 52-53 in Writ Petition (C) No. 328 of 2002, this Hon’ble Court acknowledged that land for land as envisaged in the Award was not given to the PAF’s and therefore, as an alternative, directed payment of Rs.60 lakhs to enable the PAFs to purchase lands. To another category of oustees, who were duped because of faulty Special Rehabilitation Package policy of the State, a sum of Rs.15 lakhs was directed to be given to them.
For resettlement sites, it was observed that affected persons should approach the GRA and thereafter, to the Competent Court i.e. the High Court. True Copy of the Order dated 08.02.2017 passed by this Hon’ble Court in IA Nos.42, 43, 50-51 & 52-53 in Writ Petition (C) No. 328 of 2002 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-2 (Pages Nos. 60 to 70).
6.7. That from facts which have been gathered by the Petitioners, it is clear that the payment of 60 lakhs and 15 lakhs have not been received by large number of oustees. The rehabilitation sites are in very bad conditions and are not habitable. The government has now issued work orders for repair and for other works at the rehabilitation sites. The State Government is however, forcing the oustees i.e. tribals, women and children to vacate their villages on the ground that in the order dated 08.02.2017, this Hon’ble Court has fixed a deadline of 31.07.2017.
6.8. That as per the liberty granted by this Hon’ble Court various oustees have filed complaints before the GRA, wherein, it was, inter alia, pointed out that the R&R sites do not have provision for even basic civic amenities and facilities. None of these individual complaints have been decided by the GRA. Only a general common order dated 25.04.2017 has been passed, wherein with regard to R&R sites, it was observed as follows:
“as far as the question of providing all amenities at the rehabilitation sites of displaced farmers is concerned, the Commissioner of Narmada Valley Development Authority is directed to get all R&R site inspected by competent officials and if there is any deficiency in the provision of basic amenities, the same should be completed within a time period of 2 months and the compliance report be submitted to the GRA”
True translated copy of the common Order dated 25.04.2017 passed by the GRA in ANNEXURE P-3 (Pages Nos. 71 to 85).
Even this order of the GRA has not been complied with by the NVDA and other government authorities, which they ought to have carried out in terms of the order dated 8.2.2017 of this Hon’ble Court. The R&R sites do not have even basic amenities like drinking water.
6.9. The State Government and other State Authorities, in the meanwhile have issued government orders, notices, advertisements etc. which are coercive in nature, wherein the oustees have been directed to vacate their houses and properties before 31.07.2017. The said GO’s, advertisements, and notices have been worded in such a manner which requires the PAFs to give an undertaking to vacate their land to receive the benefit to which they are entitled. Said documents also reflect the allurements/promises being made by the NVDA and the State of Madhya Pradesh for payment of different benefits etc. only on a precondition that the oustees would submit an undertaking and vacate their houses in different villages on or before 31.07.2017 and it is only after the vacation that they would be provided all such promised benefits. Those promises are in the nature of compensatory allowance for the lack of Rehabilitation Sites, Amenities there and various other deficiencies in implementation in the R & R measures, which were mandatory in nature. Making such offer the State is trying to portray itself as benevolent, but, the fact is that those are face saving measures. These actions and the documents on the face of it show admission on part of the state authorities that R&R of the PAFs/ Oustees of the Sardar Sarovar Dam are lagging far behind. True translated copy of the Announcement by the Chief Minister dated 24.05.2017 is ANNEXURE P-4 (Pages Nos. 86 to 88)., True translated copy of the Gazette Notification dated 25.05.2017 issued by the NVDA is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-5 (Pages Nos. 89).True translated copy of the order of the NVDA dated 05.06.2017 is annexed herewith and ANNEXURE P-6 (Pages Nos. 90 to 93).
6.10. The Petitioners most humbly submit that in the present Writ Petition they are only concerned about forcible dispossession to thousands of people, nearly 40,000 families living in 192 villages, when the State has failed to provided them rehabilitation sites with all civic amenities and facilities, which they were bound to provide/complete six months before submergence. This is where the gross injustice is being perpetrated by the State authorities under the cover of the date 31.7.2017, given by this Hon’ble Court, in blatant violation of Art.21 and the judgments of this Hon’ble Court.
6.11. That the Petitioners most humbly submit that this Hon’ble Court in the order dated 08.02.2017, while referring to the plight of oustees, quoted from Justice Jha Commission Report, being aware that rehabilitation has to be completed much before submergence. It was never the intention of this Hon’ble Court to fix a date which enables the State Government to take unjust advantage of by denying the rehabilitation, amenities and facilities to thousands of oustees.
6.12. That the action of forcible eviction by the State Government, in the humble submission of the Petitioners, is patently wrong. The State being the guardian of people’s legal and constitutional rights ought to have come to this Hon’ble Court itself for extension of time as they failed to provide R&R benefits to the oustees. Instead of doing that, as mentioned above, they are using force to evict persons from 192 villages.
6.13. The NVDA although is aware that R&R has not been completed and rehabilitation sites still lack basic amenities and facilities, but, the State Authorities seem to have chosen to go ahead with the forcible eviction of oustees on the basis of the erroneous interpretation of the order of this Hon’ble Court dated 08.02.2017, whereby, uprooting about 40,000 PAFs from 192 villages forcibly.
6.14. The Petitioners most humbly submit that the oustees have a right of rehabilitation given under the Constitution (Article 21) as held by this Hon’ble Court in Narmada Bachao Andolan Vs. Union of India (Supra). The minimum, which can be done for them in these circumstances, is to stop their forcible eviction and to direct the state government to ensure their complete rehabilitation with all basic amenities and facilities at the rehabilitation sites, before they are directed to evict.
6.15. That without complete rehabilitation of the affected persons, the State and other authorities ought not to have passed the order for closing the gates thus causing submergence.
6.16. That at present, after the gates have been closed pursuant to the permission granted by Narmada Control Authority, the excess water is being diverted in the canals for irrigation purposes. It is submitted that this Hon’ble Court with the solemn hope that the concerned authorities will complete the R&R in all respects and provide all the requisite facilities and amenities at the R&R sites, envisaged the date 31.07.2017. Though the provision of basic amenities and facilities at the Rehabilitation sites is bound to take considerable time, still the authorities are coercing the PAFs to vacate their land in the submergence area in view of the date 31.07.2017. It is submitted that far from providing amenities and facilities, even proper shelter at the R&R sites does not exist, which is evidenced from the fact that the tin sheds have been put up at the R&R sites. It is submitted that forcible eviction of the 40,000 PAFs from 192 villages would be in gross violation of not only the right to life guaranteed to them under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, but would also violate the rule of law.
7. Therefore, the present Petition is being filed Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, seeking protection of the fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India of the PAF’s of the Sardar Sarovar Project on following, amongst other, Grounds:
GROUNDS
A. Because the terms and conditions of the NWDTA, R&R policy, principles laid down by three judges Bench of this Hon’ble Court in the case of Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India (2000) 10 SCC 664 assuring that the PAFs would be “better-off” after rehabilitation have been violated by the State. The Petitioners submit that failure to rehabilitate the oustees on the face of it violates judgments of this Hon’ble Court, human rights of the oustees as well as Article 21 of the Constitution.
B. Because besides several important conditions mentioned in the NWDTA with regard to R&R, one condition which is important and relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the present Writ Petition is regarding the completion of R&R in all respects and thereafter, granting time of six months to the PAFs to settle at the rehabilitation sites before permitting submergence. (vide Clause XI (v)(3)(iii)). This Hon’ble Court has not only reiterated the same in two earlier Narmada Bachao Andolan judgments of 2000 and 2005 (supra) pertaining specifically to the Sardar Sarovar Dam, but has emphasised this principle in the case of N.D. Jayal v. Union of India, 2004(9) SCC 362, which was in respect of the Tehri Dam:
“60. Rehabilitation is not only about providing just food, clothes or shelter. It is also about extending support to rebuild livelihood by ensuring necessary amenities of life. Rehabilitation of the oustees is a logical corollary of Article 21. The oustees should be in a better position to lead a decent life and earn livelihood in the rehabilitated locations. Thus observed this Court in Narmada Bachao Andolan case [(2000) 10 SCC 664]. The overarching projected benefits from the dam should not be counted as an alibi to deprive the fundamental rights of oustees. They should be rehabilitated as soon as they are uprooted. And none of them should be allowed to wait for rehabilitation. Rehabilitation should take place before six months of submergence. Such a time-limit was fixed by this Court in B.D. Sharma v. Union of India [1992 Supp (3) SCC 93] and this was reiterated in Narmada [(2000) 10 SCC 664]. This prior rehabilitation will create a sense of confidence among the oustees and they will be in a better position to start their life by acclimatizing themselves with the new environment.”
In B.D. Sharma v. Union of India, [(1992) Supp 3 SCC 93], it was observed by a three judge Bench of this Hon’ble Court that:
“7. Rehabilitation should be so done that at least six months before area is likely to be submerged, rehabilitation should be complete and should be in respect of homestead substitution of agricultural property and such other arrangements which are contemplated under the rehabilitation Scheme.”
In humble submission the order dated 08.02.2017 passed by this Hon’ble Court the same principle has been observed. However, the authorities have failed to comply with the said direction and is now taking advantage of the said date without fulfilling the other obligations pertaining to R&R.
C. Because as per order dated 08.02.2017,though the PAFs had raised their grievances before the GRA but the GRA did not pass specific orders directing that the authorities concerned should redress the problems relating to R&R sites, which were raised by the PAFs. The GRA had only passed a common order dated 25.04.2017 wherein it was observed as follows:
“as far as the question of providing all amenities at the rehabilitation sites of displaced farmers is concerned, the Commissioner of Narmada Valley Development Authority is directed to get all R&R site inspected by competent officials and if there is any deficiency in the provision of basic amenities, the same should be completed within a time period of 2 months and the compliance report be submitted to the GRA”
It is submitted that the NVDA and other authorities have not complied with even the above directions given by the GRA.
D. Because besides the grant of land for land to the eligible oustees and such other benefits, Clause XI (IV)(3) of the NWDTA is a pertinent which provides for the allotment of house plots, amenities and facilities and various other payments, which facilitate shifting of the oustees to the rehabilitation site. In fact, six months before submergence, the State should have ensured that the PAFs have at the rehabilitation site, a house to live in, drinking water, sanitation, sewerage and drainage facilities, primary health centre, primary/middle/high school, grazing ground, cemetery, etc. But presently, the position is that practically none of these amenities and facilities exists on the ground.
E. Because the State Government and other State Authorities, have issued government orders, notices, advertisements etc. which are coercive in nature, directing the oustees to vacate their houses and properties before 31.07.2017. The said GO’s, advertisements, and notices have been worded in a such a manner which requires the PAFs to give an undertaking to vacate their land and to receive the benefit to which they are entitled. The forcible eviction of the PAF’s without there being complete R & R is violative of the Fundamental Right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
F. Because without completing R&R the State Authorities have chosen to go ahead with the forcible eviction of oustees on the basis of the erroneous interpretation of the order of this Hon’ble Court dated 08.02.2017, whereby, uprooting about 40,000 PAFs from 192 villages forcibly.
G. Because due impounding nearly 40,000 PAFs /Oustees will be forcibly evicted from 192 villages which include women, children, aged persons, poor advises at the rehabilitation sites where no facilities worth the name exist. This is being done in violation of the NWDTA, and the judgments of this Hon’ble Court stated above.
8. That the Petitioners have not filed any other Petition before this Hon’ble Court or any High Court, seeking the same or similar relief. The Petitioners have no other equally efficacious alternative remedy than to approach this Hon’ble Court by way of this Petition.
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue:
a) Appropriate Writ/Order/Directions to the Respondents to complete the Resettlement and Rehabilitation of the PAFs of the Sardar Sarovar Project, including providing all the amenities and facilities at the R&R sites in consonance with the NWDTA, judgments of this Hon’ble Court and Art. 21 of the Constitution;
b) Appropriate Writ/Order/Directions to the Respondents not to evict the PAFs of the Sardar Sarovar Project, till the time the R & R is completed in all respects and the R&R Sites are ready with all the amenities and facilities and that reasonable time is given to them to shift by providing required help by the State; AND
(c) Pass such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interests of Justice, Equity and the Law.
DRAFTED AND FILED BY
ABHIMANUE SHRESTHA
ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS
Drawn on: 19.07.2017
Filed on: 22.07.2017