Assam
Rifles Multi-Purpose Co-Operative Society Ltd. & Anr Vs. Union of India & Anr [1989] INSC 156 (1 May 1989)
Pathak,
R.S. (Cj) Pathak, R.S. (Cj) Kania, M.H.
CITATION:
1990 AIR 111 1989 SCR (2) 853 1989 SCC Supl. (1) 484 JT 1989 (2) 254 1989 SCALE
(1)1155
ACT:
Constitution
of India, 1950: Article 32--Settlement of
retired defence personnel, specially of Assam Rifles, in NEFA area--Directions
issued.
HEAD NOTE:
The
petitioners, the Assam Rifles Multi-purpose Cooperative Society, and its
Vice-Chairman a retired Military Officer, filed a writ petition in this Court
praying for directions to the respondents for implementing the scheme, approved
by the Government of India, for settling retired Defence Personnel, specially
of the Assam Rifles, in the North Eastern Region. The petitioner asserted that
in pursuance of this scheme, which assured the allotment of land, grant of
title-deeds in respect of the allotted land, facilities for movement by air,
freedom to develop the allotted area, grant of advance by way of loans etc. and
also provision of basic requirements of life for encouraging all-round economic
development of the area, about 200 retired personnel with their families
journeyed to the region and settled there.
The
respondents, in their counter affidavits contended that funds had been set
apart and basic facilities provided.
This
Court, by its Order dated February 20, 1987,
directed the Central Government to nominate a competent authority for examining
the problem, and looking into the scheme and submitting a report to the Central
Government to enable it to consider the same and take necessary steps for redressal
of the petitioners' grievances. Accordingly, the Director General of Assam
Rifles submitted to the Government his report, making a number of
recommendations in support of the scheme to settle Assam Rifles Ex-servicemen
and to ensure that the various facilities and concessions originally promised
to them were provided. The Central Government considered the recommendations at
an inter Ministerial meeting and took certain decisions and placed them before
the Court.
After
considering the report and decisions of the Government 854 thereon and
submissions made by the parties, this Court,
HELD:
The region constitutes part of Indian territory
and is located on the Indian border with China and Burma. It is in the public interest and
for the benefit of the public that settlement of Indian citizens should be
encouraged in this area and the area should be suitably developed. [856AB] More
than sufficient time has passed and it is desirable to ascertain what action
has been taken by the State Government pursuant to the requests made to it by
the Central Government to provide some of the facilities required by the
settlers, and it is considered necessary to make the following supplementary
directions: [857C-D] The Central Government and State Government should decide
between them as to which of them will give loans to the settlers and to what
extent. [857D] The Central Government should direct that the existing post
office establishment should be enlarged to handle disbursement of pensions.
[857E] The State Government should upgrade the existing middle school to the
status of High School and make adequate provision for additional seats in the
students' hostel to absorb the increasing number of seats resulting from such upgradation
and the grant of domicile certificates in relation to settlers, atleast in
respect of members of petitioner society should be considered. [857E-F]
Respondents No. 1 and 2 will file before the next date of hearing, affidavits
indicating the action taken by them pursuant to the decisions taken at the
inter-Ministerial meeting and pursuant to the directions made by this Court.
[857G]
ORIGINAL
JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 8227 of 1982.
Under
Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
Dr. Abishek
Singhvi, A. Subba Rao and A.S. Gauraya for the Petitioners.
Girish
Chandra and S. Suri for the Respondents.
855
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PATHAK, CJ. This petition under
Article 32 of the Constitution has been filed by two petitioners, the Assam
Rifles Multi-purpose Co-operative Society Limited and Major General A.S. Guraya,
AVSM (Retd.), Vice-Chairman of the said Co-operative Society. It is stated in
this petition that on the north-eastern extremity of India, between latitudes 27deg.N. and
28deg.N. and on both sides of longitude 97xE., within the former Tirup District
in the NEFA area (now in Arunachal Pradesh) lies substantial territory which is
a part of India. It is claimed that Major General Guraya
as Inspector General Assam Rifles prepared a programme for settling retired defence
personnel, specially of the Assam Rifles, in that region and took preparator
steps for effecting such settlement. It is asserted that about two hundred
retired personnel with their families journeyed to the region and settled there
on the basis of a scheme approved by the Government of India. It is alleged
that the scheme assured allotment of land, grant of title deeds in respect of
the allotted land, facilities for movement by air to and from Mohanbari,
freedom to develop the allotted areas, grant of advance by way of loans,
provision of marketing facilities for disposal of surplus produce, guaranteed
supply of essential commodities and provision of the basic requirements of life
for the purpose of encouraging the all-round economic development of the area.
The Co-operative Society was formed with the object of ameliorating the
conditions of the settlers and for improving their economic lot. The
petitioners relied on correspondence exchanged between them and the authorities
of the State Government and of the Central Government and prayed for directions
from this Court to the respondents for grant of the reliefs indicated in the
writ petition.
Counter
Affidavits have been filed by the Government of India. Most of the allegations
made by the petitioners have been denied. It is asserted that funds have been
set apart and basic facilities have been provided. It is alleged that land was
not allotted to Major Gen. Guraya as he did not belong to the Assam Rifles and
the scheme for rehabilitation of retired personnel from that unit did not cover
him. It is alleged that he has engineered this writ petition.
We may
mention at the very outset that Major General Guraya, who appears in person
before us, has categorically stated that he is not interested any more in any
personal allotment.
The
case was taken up by us on 20 February, 1987
and after 856 hearing the parties we were satisfied that settlement and
habitation in that region should be encouraged. The region constitutes part of Indian territory and is located on the Indian border
with China and Burma. It is in the public interest and for the benefit of the
public that settlement of Indian citizens should be encouraged in this area and
the area should be suitably developed. In that view, on 20 February, 1987 we
made an order directing the Central Government to nominate a competent
authority of suitable status to examine the problem and to look into the scheme
and, after hearing the petitioners, to report to the Central Government to
enable it to make an appropriate order for redress of the grievances of the
petitioners. Pursuant to the order of this Court, a report was submitted by the
present Director General, Assam Rifles in which he noted the
features of the original scheme set-forth in NEFA Adm. letter No. PC 42/63 of
16/17 August, 1963 and the approval with modifications of the Government of
India in the Ministry of External Affairs thereto, as well as the points raised
by the Assam Rifles Ex-servicemen before this Court and before the Director
General, Assam Rifles when he visited Vijayanagar for the purpose, and in that
report, he has made a number of recommendations in support of the scheme to settle
Assam Rifles Ex-servicemen and to ensure that the various facilities and
concessions originally promised to them are provided. We had directed in our
order of 20 February,
1987 that the final
order should be made by the Government of India after consideration of the
report. It seems that the Government considered the recommendations at an
inter-Ministerial meeting held in the Home Ministry on 6 July, 1987 and thereafter took the decision
contained in Annexure III to the affidavit of Shri R.K. Tandon, Deputy
Secretary (NE), Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi. It appears that the Government has decided that the Assam Rifles
Ex-servicemen who have been allotted 10-11 acres of prime land per family in a
valley should be provided with agricultural input facilities including animal
husbandry, fertilizers, insecticides as well as horticultural support under the
normal schemes run by the State Government, that the State Government should be
requested to issue specific letters in respect of each family to enable it to
obtain loans from banks and other financial institutions, that while free
air-lifts were not possible, the State Government should be asked to find out
whether the subsidised rate of Rs.89 per flight per head could be further
reduced and that in any event no charges be levied for abortive flights, that
while a full time doctor is already posted in Vijaynagar, the State Government
should be requested to post a mid-wife to the Vijayanagar hospital and to
arrange for periodical visits of a Gynaecologist, that the State PWD be
requested to undertake the repair of the suspension bridges forthwith, 857 that
the Multi-purpose Co-operative Society should apply to the State Government for
recognition, and that a meeting be called to sort out the difficulties in the
disbursal of pension by the Department of Posts and that on issues such as
grant of citizenship, loans etc. the position indicated in the minutes of the
inter-Ministerial meeting held on 6 July, 1987 should be maintained.
The
report of the present Director General Assam Rifles and the decisions taken by
the Central Government thereupon have been considered by us in the light of the
submissions made by the parties. The decisions of the Central Government placed
before us refer to requests to be made to the State Government to provide some
of the facilities required by the settlers. Reference has already been made to
those matters earlier. More than sufficient time has passed, and it is
desirable to ascertain what action has been taken by the State Government
pursuant to those requests of the Central Government. Certain supplementary
directions are necessary from this Court, and we make them now:
1. The
Central Government and the State Government should decide between them as to
which of them will give loans to the settlers and to what extent.
2. The
Central Government should direct that the existing Post Office establishment be
enlarged to handle disbursement of pensions.
3. The
State Government should upgrade the existing middle school to the status of a
high school and make adequate provision for additional seats in the student
hostel to absorb the corresponding increase in the number of students resulting
from such upgradation.
4. The
grant of domicile certificates should be considered in relation to the
settlers, at least in respect of the members of the petitioner society.
The
case will now be listed on 1 August, 1989 before which date the respondent No.
1, the Union of India, and the respondent No. 2, the State of Arunachal
Pradesh, will file affidavits indicating the action adopted by them pursuant to
the decisions taken at the inter Ministerial meeting mentioned earlier and
pursuant to the directions made by this Court in this Order.
N.P.V.
Back
