28 August,2024 04:40 PM IST | Delhi | mid-day online correspondent
Supreme Court/ File pic
The Supreme Court of India has chastised the Maharashtra government for its delays and lack of seriousness in determining compensation for a landowner whose property was "illegally" occupied over sixty years ago.
A bench of Justices BR Gavai, Prashant Mishra, and KV Viswanathan issued a show cause notice to Rajesh Kumar, the Additional Chief Secretary of the Forest and Revenue Department, asking why contempt proceedings against him should not be commenced. The court was upset by what it called "contemptuous remarks" expressed in an affidavit filed by the department, reported PTI.
According to the report, the court has directed Kumar to appear in person on September 9. The bench was frustrated with the state's "dilly-dallying" approach, observing that despite being given time to recalculate the compensation, the state had not met its commitments.
"When the state has sought time for the particular purpose of re-calculating the compensation, then it should have been done. It appears that the state is adopting dilly-dallying tactics," the bench said. The court noted that the government seemed determined from its affidavit, stated the PTI report.
"You write anything in the affidavit, the officer signs the affidavit and you expect us not to do anything," the bench
Reportedly, the court threatened to terminate the recently created 'Ladli Bahin' plan if the state did not swiftly recalculate the compensation owed.
"It is the bounden duty of the state government to follow the law and arrive at the appropriate conclusion of payment of the compensation," the bench said per the PTI report and added that the officer could not follow a "whimsical idea" and not abide by the law.
The plan, known as the 'Mukhyamantri Majhi Ladki Bahin Yojana,' offers financial assistance to qualifying women in Maharashtra.
The issue stems from the state's control of the area, which was eventually assigned to the Armament Research Development Establishment Institute (ARDEI). Although another parcel of land was assigned to the original owner, it was later discovered that this parcel was designated as forest land, the PTI report stated.
The Supreme Court has directed the applicant to visit the Pune collector's office on August 30 to assess the new piece of land offered as compensation and report back to the court.
The bench highlighted the state's responsibility to follow the law and compute compensation appropriately, taking into account current land worth rather than outmoded rates.
