Madras HC asks Tamil Nadu govt to identify sites for accommodation for homeless people

The matter pertains to a case filed by Karumalai (who goes by one name), who approached the court complaining that his requests, the latest being on July 19, 2021, was not being considered by respondents (Salem district authorities) for the purpose of issuing patta in respect of government poramboke land to homeless citizens for them to construct their houses.

While hearing a case on providing land for homeless to construct homes, the first bench of the Madras high court comprising chief justice Sanjib Banerjee and justice PD Audikesavalu hoped that Tamil Nadu will draw up a comprehensive policy within the next six months with temporary and permanent accommodation sites indicated to take care of the landless and the homeless.

The Madras high court hoped that Tamil Nadu will draw up a comprehensive policy within the next six months with temporary and permanent accommodation sites indicated to take care of the landless and the homeless. (File)

“There should be a district-level identification of sites and a detailed road-map prepared for such a purpose,” the court said in its orders on Wednesday.

The matter pertains to a case filed by Karumalai (who goes by one name), who approached the court complaining that his requests, the latest being on July 19, 2021, was not being considered by respondents (Salem district authorities) for the purpose of issuing patta in respect of government poramboke land to homeless citizens for them to construct their houses.

The court said: “It is for the executive authorities to decide how and in what manner land would be allotted to the homeless or how encroachers without any shelter may be rehabilitated elsewhere.”

Since the petitioner has said he belongs to a scheduled caste and does not have any land or asset and refers to 75 other families residing in and around Thathaiyampatty Village in Omalur Taluk of Salem district to be similarly situated, the court permitted him to make a fresh representation to the Salem district collector within four weeks.

“The matter should receive attention of the highest executive authorities, so that a comprehensive plan can be taken in respect of every district and certain cut-off parameters indicated,” the court said. The justices, however, made it clear that the petitioner cannot have a say in choice of land that would be allotted.

The court noted that the land, which the petitioner has demanded, has already been earmarked for a school and disposed off the petition.