Mussoorie: A land dispute between the Railways and residents of Jharipani in Mussoorie escalated on Monday after a railway team arrived with heavy police deployment and served eviction notices to 31 people. The notices give the occupants 15 days to vacate the land, warning that failure to do so could lead to forcible eviction.
The sudden arrival of railway officials accompanied by a large police contingent caused concern among local residents. Where residents were not present at their homes, notices were reportedly pasted on the houses.
The railway team was led by Dehradun Senior Section Engineer Ashu Sharma. According to Sharma, the concerned residents had previously been given an opportunity to present their cases and submit documents supporting their claims over the land.
Sharma said notices had been issued to 31 people in proceedings before the Estate Officer-I of the Northern Railway’s Moradabad Division. Of these, 25 people appeared before the estate court, but according to the Railways, they could not produce mutation records or other substantive documents establishing ownership of the land.
The railway official said the estate court subsequently rejected their claims and ordered the land to be vacated. The 15-day period has been granted in accordance with the court’s order, after which the land will be cleared as directed by the estate court.
The notices state that if the occupants do not vacate the land within the stipulated period, the railway administration will proceed with forcible eviction. The expenses incurred during the action will also be recovered from the occupants, according to the notice.
Residents question railway’s ownership claim
Local residents, however, dispute the railway’s claim over the land. Jharipani resident Rani said she and her family had been living in the area for around 20 years. She questioned why notices were being issued to residents who, according to her, had purchased the land from previous owners.
Rani said residents would vacate the land themselves if the Railways produced clear documents establishing its ownership. She also said the matter was before the court and that the final decision should be awaited.
Another resident, Asha Devi, accused the Railways of intimidating people living in the area. She claimed that she possesses land documents and that records are also registered with the municipal body. She said electricity and water connections were also in her name and that she had paid for the land.
Asha Devi further said that if the Railways has an objection to residents occupying the land, arrangements should be made for the rehabilitation of families who have been living there for years. She maintained that residents were being troubled despite having documents supporting their claims.
The dispute now involves competing claims over land ownership, with the Railways relying on the estate court’s order and residents continuing to challenge the ownership claim.
