Landmark Judgment Reinforces Right to Shelter Under Article 21 of the Constitution for Scheduled Castes
In a pivotal judgment delivered by the Allahabad High Court, a Division Bench comprising Justices Atul Sreedharan and Siddharth Nandan has reinforced the Sub-Divisional Magistrate's (SDM) authority to protect possession of residential land allotted to marginalized sections, including Scheduled Castes. The court ruled that the SDM is obligated to exercise powers under Section 65 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006, to safeguard the possession of allottee land against encroachment, ensuring the constitutional right to shelter under Article 21.
The case, titled "Geeta Devi v. State of U.P.," involved a writ petition filed by Smt. Geeta Devi, seeking a mandamus directing the district authorities to act against encroachers of her allotted land in Fatehpur district. Despite the land being allotted for residential purposes in 2012, Geeta Devi faced encroachment and obstruction in constructing her house, prompting her to seek judicial intervention.
The judgment delved into the interpretation of Section 65 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, examining whether the SDM's powers extend beyond the immediate post-allotment stage to protect possession at subsequent stages. The court concluded that Section 65 empowers the SDM to act at any stage, as long as the land title remains with the State or Gram Sabha. This interpretation aligns with the welfare objective of ensuring shelter to marginalized communities, particularly in rural areas.
The court distinguished between the remedies available under Section 65 and Section 134 of the Code, clarifying that Section 134 pertains to ejectment from land holdings of Bhumidhar or Asami, and is not applicable to allottees under Section 64. The judgment emphasized that Section 65 provides distinct summary proceedings initiated by the Gram Panchayat to protect possession.
Furthermore, the bench highlighted the constitutional right to shelter as a fundamental right under Article 21, underscoring the state's obligation to prevent encroachment and ensure housing for marginalized persons. The court rejected a contrary interpretation from a previous judgment, asserting that the SDM's duty to protect possession persists until the allottee's objective of constructing a shelter is achieved.
The decision is a significant affirmation of the rights of marginalized communities, reinforcing their access to land and shelter as a constitutional guarantee. It sets a precedent for future cases, ensuring that legal protections are extended to those in vulnerable positions.
Bottom Line:
Interpretation of Section 65 of the U.P. Revenue Code, 2006 regarding protection of possession of land allotted for residential purposes to marginalized sections, including Scheduled Castes, ensuring their right to shelter under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Statutory provision(s): Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 Sections 63, 64, 65, 129, 134; Constitution of India, Article 21, Article 19(1)(e).
Geeta Devi v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2866642
