I am told PTI has issued today a release about start
of evacuations in view of rising level of Yamuna.
I have private interest in the Yamuna (duly-expressed
via non-PIL case against metro constructions on
riverbed and complaints to Police Commissioner against
MCD usage of riverbank, etc) and am puzzled by latest
Division-Bench Order-of-03/05/05 for it, as follows:
* on 13/04/05 notice to reply in 2-weeks was issued by
single-judge in my non-PIL,
* on 25/04/05 land use change from riverbed to
commercial was notified for the IT Park,
* on 03/05/05 DB ordered clearance without
resettlement from river-BANK, saying encroachments are
on water-body not land,
* on 23/05/05 opposite-counsel showed up in mine with
notification of 25/04/05 in lieu of reply and
contended their structures on river-BED are on
dry-land not water.
By opposite-counsel logic rising level of Yamuna means
watery-BANK is going to flood dry-BED. But I am
reliably informed that evacuations are starting from
watery-BANK. I am further informed they are not
starting in the portion across IT-Park and including
MCD-NGO night-shelter (both come up in contempt of
Order-of-03/03/03 against ALL unauthorised structures
on river-BED&BANKS). This is normally safe from
flood-wrath of the river and at risk only of
demolition to save DDA VC from contempt-wrath of court
re Order-of-03/05/05 (for which I am reliably informed
that yesterday school authorities in Pushta have been
advised to advise parents to enrol children
elsewhere).
Having private interest in river and in solving
puzzles, I have made following requests:
1. Since those evacuated from watery-BANK to dry-land
(not dry-BED) may not be able to return in view of
Order-of-03/03/03 but will cease to attract the
no-resettlement portion of Order-of-03/05/05, they
should be lawfully relocated to proper housing from
the flood-relief camps.
2. Flood-safe sites on river-BANKorBED, like metro IT
Park and MCD-ActionAid Night Shelter, should be used
as flood-relief-camp cum transit-housing, also to
atone somewhat for the contempt-of-court.
3. In case demolitions on flood-safe watery-BANK are
unavoidable to save DDA VC from contempt proceedings,
DDA/Police must ensure lawful procedure including
proper eviction notices (inclusive of reasonable
opportunity for hearing, which should suffice for
lawful and just solutions since enough people in the
threatened portion have them figured out).
I have written to LG/DDA Chairman (cc, wrt prior
prose, to Police Commissioner, DDA Commissioner
Planning and Lok Sabha Standing Committee). I issue
prose out of private interest and am normally not
public-spirited, but these are also for others who,
like me, feel guilty (as distinct from routinely-bad
of the activists) about what happened on the
river-bed&bank last year and will feel disgusted by
the probable flood-relief-camp-visit histrionics in
coming days -- unless the locale is, say, IT Park ;)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
of evacuations in view of rising level of Yamuna.
I have private interest in the Yamuna (duly-expressed
via non-PIL case against metro constructions on
riverbed and complaints to Police Commissioner against
MCD usage of riverbank, etc) and am puzzled by latest
Division-Bench Order-of-03/05/05 for it, as follows:
* on 13/04/05 notice to reply in 2-weeks was issued by
single-judge in my non-PIL,
* on 25/04/05 land use change from riverbed to
commercial was notified for the IT Park,
* on 03/05/05 DB ordered clearance without
resettlement from river-BANK, saying encroachments are
on water-body not land,
* on 23/05/05 opposite-counsel showed up in mine with
notification of 25/04/05 in lieu of reply and
contended their structures on river-BED are on
dry-land not water.
By opposite-counsel logic rising level of Yamuna means
watery-BANK is going to flood dry-BED. But I am
reliably informed that evacuations are starting from
watery-BANK. I am further informed they are not
starting in the portion across IT-Park and including
MCD-NGO night-shelter (both come up in contempt of
Order-of-03/03/03 against ALL unauthorised structures
on river-BED&BANKS). This is normally safe from
flood-wrath of the river and at risk only of
demolition to save DDA VC from contempt-wrath of court
re Order-of-03/05/05 (for which I am reliably informed
that yesterday school authorities in Pushta have been
advised to advise parents to enrol children
elsewhere).
Having private interest in river and in solving
puzzles, I have made following requests:
1. Since those evacuated from watery-BANK to dry-land
(not dry-BED) may not be able to return in view of
Order-of-03/03/03 but will cease to attract the
no-resettlement portion of Order-of-03/05/05, they
should be lawfully relocated to proper housing from
the flood-relief camps.
2. Flood-safe sites on river-BANKorBED, like metro IT
Park and MCD-ActionAid Night Shelter, should be used
as flood-relief-camp cum transit-housing, also to
atone somewhat for the contempt-of-court.
3. In case demolitions on flood-safe watery-BANK are
unavoidable to save DDA VC from contempt proceedings,
DDA/Police must ensure lawful procedure including
proper eviction notices (inclusive of reasonable
opportunity for hearing, which should suffice for
lawful and just solutions since enough people in the
threatened portion have them figured out).
I have written to LG/DDA Chairman (cc, wrt prior
prose, to Police Commissioner, DDA Commissioner
Planning and Lok Sabha Standing Committee). I issue
prose out of private interest and am normally not
public-spirited, but these are also for others who,
like me, feel guilty (as distinct from routinely-bad
of the activists) about what happened on the
river-bed&bank last year and will feel disgusted by
the probable flood-relief-camp-visit histrionics in
coming days -- unless the locale is, say, IT Park ;)
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com