HC upholds individual rehab rights of displaced citizens

The Bombay High Court ruled that displaced citizens, like a 91-year-old woman, are entitled to individual compensation, challenging the state's 'single unit' theory.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Friday questioned the state’s ‘single unit’ theory, a legal argument used to deny individual compensation to displaced persons affected by the Koyna Wildlife Sanctuary (KWS) Project.

HC upholds individual rehab rights of displaced citizens

In a ruling that could reshape the approach to rehabilitation entitlements, the court ordered Maharashtra authorities to provide a 91-year-old woman with an independent plot, establishing that displaced citizens are entitled to separate compensations, even if they are a part of the same family unit.

Dagdabai Vitthal Kadam lived in her home in Zhadoli village, Satara, for over six decades before it was acquired in 2012 for the KWS Project. Her three stepsons each received compensation and an alternate piece of land as part of the project’s rehabilitation measures. Kadam was excluded from compensation, with the state arguing that she was part of a ‘single unit’ with her stepsons and therefore indirectly benefited from their compensation.

Kadam’s counsel, advocate Ketan Shinde, argued that the state’s approach ignored her lawful right to compensation, presenting records proving her ownership of the property since 1998 in the Gram Panchayat after her husband passed away. He further argued that the ‘single unit’ concept was both procedurally unfounded and unfair, as her stepsons had been awarded individual compensations unrelated to her property.

The court clarified that under the Wildlife (Protection) Act (WPA), grouping Kadam with her stepsons as a single entity lacked a legal foundation. Her independent ownership of the property, recognized since 1998, should afford her the same compensation and rehabilitation rights as any other property owner. It also noted treating family as a single unit would contradict the allocation of individual compensations given to each of Kadam’s stepsons.

The court observed that to protect individuals who acquire property through succession, the WPA also guaranteed Kadam the same rehabilitation as her late husband would have received. The judges criticized the state’s approach of selectively ignoring this provision, causing undue hardship for the elderly petitioner.