VIJAYAWADA: In a major setback to the state government, Andhra Pradesh High Court directed it not to proceed with construction of houses under its flagship programme ‘Navaratnalu-Pedalandiriki Illu’ in the land allotted to the beneficiaries until a report submitted by a special committee modifying the layouts.
A single judge bench headed by Justice M. Satyanarayana issued the order here on Friday stating that allotment of sites for residential purpose was inadequate for housing on account of cluster housing and group housing, the environment impact on health hazards, fire safety, adequacy of drinking water and facilities to drain out sewage water were to be examined before constructing house in the site allotted to them. The court observed that no study was taken up on such issues by the state government so far.
The bench observed, “The court is not against allotment of house sites to women, but it amounts to discrimination. Therefore, I feel that it is appropriate to direct the respondents to consider the eligibility of men and transsexual for allotment of house site. At the same time, with regard to effect of health, physical, mental, spiritual, educational and economic development with reference to human rights guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution of India, it is appropriate to examine the issue by a committee of experts to increase the extent of land allotted and to be allotted based on the report to be submitted by it.”
The court directed the state government to appoint a special committee consisting of experts from Central Pollution Control Board, union ministry of housing and urban development and union ministry of health and family welfare to examine the issues and submit a report within one month thereafter and invite objections from the public and finalise the scheme Navaratnalu-Pedalandiriki Illu for construction of houses in the sites keeping in view several issues as mentioned above.
The court observed that if the policy decision of the state government was violative of any fundamental right or human rights, it was bound to interfere with such decisions. The court declared the GOs issued earlier as ‘illegal and arbitrary’ and set them aside.
