SC seeks Assam’s reply on Goalpara eviction drive, cites violation of guidelines
The apex court directed the authorities to explain how the eviction was carried out in “apparent violation” of its guidelines and why due legal procedures were not followed.
A file image of Supreme Court (Photo: IANS)
New Delhi, July 25: The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice to the Assam government in connection with a recent eviction drive carried out at Hasila Beel in Goalpara district.
The notice was issued by a bench comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran to the Chief Secretary of Assam, District Commissioner and Superintendent of Police of Goalpara, Revenue and Disaster Management Department and the local Circle Officer, seeking a detailed report on the issue within two weeks.
The apex court directed the authorities to explain how the eviction was carried out in “apparent violation” of its guidelines and why due legal procedures were not followed.
The evicted families and Assam State Jamiat Ulama had approached the apex court, claiming that the eviction was executed in contempt of the Supreme Court’s earlier orders.
The plea referred to the top court’s November 13, 2024 verdict which laid down pan-India guidelines and barred demolition of properties without a prior showcause notice and 15 days’ time to the aggrieved party to respond.
The petition was registered under PIL Diary No. 37759/2025.
The petitioners argued that the eviction drive was carried out arbitrarily without following the due process and violated the fundamental rights of the people.
Senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, representing the petitioners on behalf of the Assam State Jamiat Ulama led by Maulana Badruddin Ajmal, argued the case before the court.
The plea alleged that mass eviction and demolition drives in June affected over 667 families and added that the demolition exercise was carried out without granting personal hearing and providing adequate time for appeal or judicial review.
“Apart from that, the eviction and demolition exercise predominantly targeted a minority community, leaving out similarly placed persons from the majority community untouched, thereby constituting discriminatory implementation and carrying out of the eviction drive by the authorities concerned...,” the plea said.
Hegde said a notice of only two days was given and the demolition was carried out immediately thereafter.
“Why don’t you go to the high court?” the CJI asked.
Hegde said several persons moved the high court and the plea there was also about rehabilitation.
He said even encroachers were entitled to due process of law.
“These are 667 poor families who have been there on that land for 60-70 years,” Hegde said.
By
A correspondent