Stay on eviction, demolition, dispossession in Maharashtra till Sept 30: HC

Bench noted that in light of lockdown norms being relaxed, the warning by the experts could not be neglected, hence the government should take steps to curb it

Taking into consideration the opinions of experts that the third wave of the Covid pandemic is knocking at the doors, the full bench of the Bombay high court (HC) on Tuesday decided to keep in abeyance orders passed by various courts and authorities related to eviction, dispossession and demolition in the state till September 30.

Bombay high court.

The bench noted that in light of lockdown norms being relaxed, which has resulted in crowding at public places, the warning by the experts could not be neglected, hence the government should take steps to curb it.

A full bench of chief justice Dipankar Datta, justices AA Sayed, KK Tated and PB Varale extended the interim orders while hearing the suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) instituted last year in April to provide protection to those who were unable to access justice due to restricted functioning of courts due to the pandemic.

While observing that the administrative committee of the HC in its meeting on Monday had been apprised by of the possibility of a third wave due to rising Covid cases by the head of the special task force, it had decided to continue physical hearing of cases with certain precautionary measures and also continue with the hybrid system. The bench also referred to the view of the special task force head that the country could not get rid of the pandemic till April 2022 and held that in light of this, the state had to ensure that all safety protocols were followed.

“Considering the view placed by the experts, the situation of uncertainty and the ensuing festivities which could pose a threat to the humankind, we are of the opinion that the interest of justice would be served if the protective interim orders are extended till September 30,” noted the full bench.

The full bench will again assemble on September 24 and take a review of the situation and decide on whether the interim orders need to be extended or not. In the previous hearing, the bench had indicated that while it was extending interim orders till August 31, it was not inclined to extend the protection any further thereafter.