The division bench of Chief Justice Sabharwal and Justice A P Shah then proceeded to direct that the state government file an affidavit on the details involved in the rehabilitation programme. The number of people who will be rehabilitated, where and what would be the amentities involved, when will the process start and by what date will it approximately end. The matter is now fixed for next Friday.

Advocate general Sawant was referring to the Bombay High Court order of May 7,1997 wherein the court had declared that all the encroachers in and around the Borivali national Park, also known as the Sanjay Gandhi national park would have to be removed. The state had at that time agreed to have them rehabilitated. At the hearing today - essentially to take stock of the state government's progress on the issue - the advocate general first claimed that there was a problem. While a rough 30,000 of the 60,000 odd who lived in the park had been driven out, according to him, since they were not in the ``tolerated dateline'' of 1.1.95, he claimed there was a difficulty in rehabilitating the rest, 33,000.

``This is the time when we are being forced to do a rethink on the May order, since there are problems,'' he said adding that otherwise the entire exercise will take a long time and ``I will personally feel embarassed to come to the court asking for more time,'' he said. He also mentioned that the Kalyan Municipal Corporation had passed a resolution rejecting the state government's decisionto house the slumdwellers in five villages in its outskirts.

However, when asked to clarify if the state was willing to rehabilitate the encroachers on the park, he later claimed the state was willing. As per the government, land has been identified in Thane, Kalyan, Ambernath and Ulhasnagar for the rehabilitation of the encroachers, who are protected by the January, 1, 1995 deadline. In Kalyan, five villages, of which four lie in the green zone, have to be denotified and notices have to be issued. According to Sawant, 781 pitches can be accommodated in village Gheysar which does not fall in the green zone. Around 17,000 pitches have been identified in the rest of the other four villages.

The Chief Justice then pointed out that the state could begin with this village and complete the process of denotifying the other four. Asked the amount of time that this would entail, Sawant claimed that it would be at least by the end of October. He then remarked that this was not considering the impending elections,notifications for which are expected by end of July, he said.

The expense of rehabilitation, whereby the state will be giving pitches to the encroachers, roads, water and electricity as well as with provisions for schools and dispensaries is expected to tot up to Rs 78 crore. Justice Shah then remarked that it was not necessary that the pitches be given free. ``You could charge a sum of Rs 5000 per pitch, that could come up to Rs 85 crore,'' he said. However, when Sawant said that the money could be made a part of the order, the bench held that they would include it if only the state wanted it.

Counsel for the petitioners, the Bombay Environmental Action Group (BEAG) Iqbal Chagla however pointed out that the advocate general's statements were a reflection of the state government's plans for the oncoming elections. He urged that at least one official of the state government be made responsible for the action and be called upon to file an affidavit. The bench then proceeded to give the order.

Plea onpay and park rejected

The division bench of the Chief Justice today found no merit in a petition filed by the Ballard Estate Welfare Association which had challenged the creation of a pay and park facility at the Ramjibhai Kamani road claiming it had only led to more traffic congestion.

``After the pay and park scheme was set up, there are tourist buses that are being parked in the area,'' argued the counsel for the association. ``So where will the heavy vehicles go?'' countered Chief Justice Y K Sabharwal. ``There has to be some system,'' said the counsel. To which the Chief Justice remarked, ``Do you have an alternate scheme?''.

The association also claimed that Bombay Port Trust (BPT), which owned the road, was not consulted before the pay and park scheme was introduced.