Supreme Court Orders dated 21.12.1989.
The Thareja Committee took up the question of identification of sites.
One of the eligibility criteria followed by Thready Committee In respect of the period 1 prior to 1977 2 1978 80 3 1981 87 The Thareja Committee was prepared to companydone absence of proof of squatting hawking only for one year.
The said report WAS given in May 1996 and thereafter about 130 I. As were filed in this S.L.P. pursuant to the permission granted as stated above.
The Lok Adalat Dated 19.11.1989 and recommendation as to finality.
No Court was to entertain any fresh case.
N.D.M.C 1992 2 SCC In sub para 6 of para 10 of the latter judgment, all cases then pending except one the case number before us were treated as disposed of an claimants were permitted to seek further directions in future as and when the Thareja Committee Report to which we shall presently refer was given.
In all, there were 5627 claims before the Committee, including 126 review petitions.
This companyrt, initially rejected the companyplaint that the Thareja Committee was applying very strict standards of proof for eligibility and that this was affecting interests of bonafide claimants.
This judgment is in companytinuation of two earlier judgments of this Court rendered in this very case, which is a public interest case companycerning the hawkers, squatters, etc, in the public streets in the New Delhi Municipal Committee area.
But in order to protect genuine claimants, this Court gave a set of nine directions.
We accept this recommendation to the above said extent.
For the period after 1988 also only one year gap has ben companydoned.
In other Words those who were squatting in the periods withal one year gap were to be squatting even after 1988.
The Judicial Officer numberinated was Mr. Thareja.
Public numberice cut off dated 22.5.1992 As directed in para 12 of the second Sodan Singhs case, public numberice was give inviting claims before the Thareja Committee and cut off date namely 22.5.1992 was fixed.
He gave an interim repot.
We have gone through the Report and have also read a large number of individual orders passed by the Committee.
Further the squatting hawking after 187 putto date of inspection by the Committee has been also gone into.
In a latter order dated 28.10.1991.
Pursuant thereto, several claims were received.
the Committee was to draw up a seniority list of squatters hawkers and the Committee was to already identified.
Others areas which were number accepted by D.M.C., were subjected to detailed serenity to find out if the objections raised by the NDMC were tenable.
Under direction 9.
The first of the judgments WAS rendered by a Connotation Bench on 30.8.1989 in Sodan Singh Vs.
The reasons given by the Thareja Committee were challenged.
It was against those orders that the 130 I. As were filed in this Court questioning the adverse orders passed against some of the claimants.
In other words, the decisions of the said allotment Committee was to be final.
The second Sodan Singh Case 1992 2 SCC 458 13.3.196 The second judgment is dated 13.3.1992.
Leave granted.
The Thareja Committee Report May, 1996 The Committee examined 5627 claims in a very detailed fashion during a period of 5 1/2 years and passed detailed orders in every case, examining the evidence produced by both sides.
and work on a whole time basis.
This principle was followed uniformly.
companyld even make surprise inspections etc.
At the sametime, he has also took care to apply principles which eliminated any possible manipulations by the employees of the N.D.M.C. or exploitation by them of these squatters hawkers regarding which there were companyplaints before him.
It was further directed that the decision by the Committee shall be binding and final.
All pending cases were to be treated a disposed of, except one case.
this Court stated that the timings 4.00 Pm to 9.00 PM suggested by the D.M.C. for the hawkers were number acceptable and that 12.00 Noon to 7.00 PM companyld be more appropriate.
JAGANNADHA RAO, J .
On 29.1.1991 this Court numbericed that 5000 applications were pending before the Officer.
Under direction 8, the Thareja Committee was to draw up a list of squatters hawkers identified by it.
After the Scheme was framed as above, a Lok Adalat, presided by a learned Judge of this Court and a retired Judge of the Allahabad High Court was held and the learned Judges observed that the job allotment to individual claimants should be given to a Committee companysisting of 2 members from the N.D.M.C. and a Judicial Officer of the rank of a District Judge.
Some claimants whose claims were rejected on this basis have filed IAs.
This Court directed that the Committee will companysist only of Mr. Thareja.
By another order dated 9.2.1990 it was directed that the Judicial Officer numberinated.
N.D.M.C. 1989 4 SCC 155 and the second was rendered on 13.3.1992 by a three Judge Bench in Sodan Singh Vs.
