Is Gujarat Peaceful Or Disturbed ?
BY R.K.MISRA
Contradictions
confound .Is Gujarat peaceful or disturbed?
Peaceful says
the BJP
which swept Gujarat with its highest ever tally for a seventh term in
the just concluded elections claiming that it had established permanent peace
statewide in its quarter century old rule. The assertion came from the union
home minister. Contradiction : published
studies establish that the area under the Disturbed Areas Act(DAA) grew by over
50 per cent in the six years from 2013 to 2019 in Ahmedabad alone. So is the
state peaceful or is it disturbed? In the contradiction hangs a tale.
The Disturbed
Areas Act was first enacted a year after
the 1985 communal riots in Ahmedabad after it was observed that people who were
in numerical minority in a particular
area were being coerced to sell their properties at throwaway prices to move to
areas which afforded the security of their own communities. The Act was meant
to prevent this segregation through
distress sale.
First introduced
through an Ordinance by the Congress-led government in 1986, it was converted
into a law in 1991 by the then Chimanbhai Patel led government. This law was
substantially amended by the BJP government in July 2019 and received
Presidential assent in 2020. The Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable
Property and Provisions of Tenants From Eviction from Premises in Disturbed
Areas Act, is popularly known as the Disturbed Areas Act(DAA).
The law amended by the BJP government enhances
punishment for violation of this law . It prohibits sale and tenancy of
immovable property to persons of another religion in the area notified as
disturbed. The amendment enhanced punishment
from earlier six months to three to five
years or fine of Rs one lakh or ten per cent of the stamp duty in place of the
earlier fine of Rs 10,000. More importantly, it made the district collector’s
nod for any transaction in such areas mandatory and armed the government with
powers to review his decision. Earlier
the buyer and sellers consent was enough. The Congress plea for abolishing the
law since it would further deepen the communal divide and push them towards
greater segregation was lost in the din.
The issue came
to the fore afresh on January 6 when the Gujarat High Court issued notice to
the state government over two petitions challenging the imposition of the DAA
in new areas of Ahmedabad and Anand districts.
In October 2022
the state government had imposed restrictions on property transactions in in Dhandhuka town of Ahmedabad district
and and Petlad and Borsad towns of Anand
district.
The petitions
filed by Jamiat-ulema-e-hind, Gujarat
takes exception to the state government’s decision to apply the DAA in the new
areas. Last year ,it had sought similar intervention in Rajkot and the Surat
Textile shop Broker’s association was also up in arms on imposition of such
restrictions on properties in commercial areas of Surat.
The Jamiat
contention was that the Act envisages two kinds of ‘clustering’. While the
clustering of persons with one common identity was considered proper, other
forms of communities are treated as
’improper’. This would result in segregation on grounds of religion and race
leading to ghettoization and the creation of enclaves. It was also pointed out
that while the said Act was “apparently neutral”, in reality the muslim
community would be at a disadvantage. Additionally it was also in violation of
the constitutional principle that allows an Indian citizen to reside anywhere
in the country and worked to the disadvantage of the muslim community besides
giving the state unbridled discretion to declare a neighbourhood as disturbed
area.
There are at
least half a dozen cases pertaining to the Act up for judicial redressal. In
August last year the DAA was challenged in the Gujarat High Court on the ground
that the law does not leave scope for residents to register any objections
against any area being demarcated as communally disturbed. The Act is also in
violation of the principles of natural justice since provisions in this law
provide that the authorities are not obliged to invite objections from the
public before declaring it as such,petitioner Ali Hussain Vohra of Vadodara has contended.
According to a 2019 published report the Act is enforced across 770
locations spread over Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Surat ,Himmatnagar, Godhra,
Kapadvanj, besides numerous other areas, most of them muslim dominated. As a muslim leader pointed out, in
Gujarat a foreigner can come and buy
properties in neighbourhoods where Muslims cannot.
A classic case is that of Varsha flats in Paldi area
of Ahmedabad. Last week the Gujarat High Court issued notice to the state
government after 13 persons who had
brought properties at Varsha flats, filed petition against the decision of the
authorities to refuse permission for sale/purchase of 10 flats under the
Disturbed Areas Act(DAA).
The petitioners case is that dilapidated houses of the
Jankalyan cooperative housing society Ltd went into re-development and made way
for flats. Its hindu owners sold their flats to muslim persons. Since the area
falls under the DAA many sellers/purchasers took the mandatory permission from
the revenue authorities. However 10 flat owners who had not taken permission
sought the same post-facto but were turned down. Their appeals right up to the
Special secretary, Revenue met the same fate. Criminal cases were also
filed against them prompting them to
approach the High Court which has granted them interim stay.
In fact the woes of the Varsha flat owners began in 2018 when Hindu
Jagran Manch, a right wing organisation
launched a protest against the sale and the
authorities which until then had no issues, soon did a somersault and
the ordeal of the residents began and
continues till this day as the matter
awaits judicial redressal.
However in an important verdict related to the DAA in
December 2022, the Gujarat High Court has ruled that the free consent of the
seller and purchaser as well as ample market price given to the seller are the
two important ingredients while deciding an application made to the authority
concerned for permission to sell a property.
The Court was hearing an application filed by Surat
residents objecting to the transfer of a 5000 sq.metres land plot in their area
to a firm where majority stake was with members of the muslim community who
have got permission through an application filed by a hindu partner having 10
per cent stake in the firm. The Surat Collector had revoked the permission after
protests from a hindu organization and
local residents. The partner filed an appeal before the government authority
which granted permission. The local residents then approached the High Court
against it but their plea was dismissed. The plea was that granting permission
through a partnership firm owned by a muslim family can cause ‘polarisation’ in
the area where a majority of residents are from hindu and jain
communities. EOM
http://epaper.lokmat.com/
http://odishapostepaper.com/edition/4357/orissa-post/page/9
Comments
Post a Comment