Melli Sonam challenges eviction in High Court

GANGTOK, 05 Dec: Even as the dust has barely settled over the proven illegal action and subsequent contempt of court by the four officials of South District, including the DM, in sealing Nuk Tshering Bhutia’s house in Melli, Mr. Bhutia has already approached the High Court of Sikkim with a petition challenging the eviction order issued by the DM South on 11 October, 2011. By this order, “Melli Sonam”, as Mr. Bhutia is more popularly known, had been directed to evict his residential building on the Melli-Jorethang road at Melli as it was claimed by the authorities to have been constructed on Forest land.
This order of the DM South had been passed under the Sikkim Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants and Rent Recovery) Act, 1980.
The decision to approach the High Court against the order of the DM was taken primarily after the appellate authority, finding itself to have no jurisdiction over the matter, found it fit to be referred to a court of law.
While the order of eviction was passed on 10 October, the building was sealed by the South district authorities on 11 November, on the expiry of the one-month notice. Following this, an appeal was filed by Melli Sonam with the appellate authority - the Law Secretary.
Interestingly, and also somewhat confusingly, the appellate authority, observed that the land in question was disputed and involved the applicability and otherwise of Forest law or any other law including the above mentioned Act of 1980 besides also involving issues of “…whether a forest land having been under a civil works department loses its character of being such and other relevant issues…”. And while claiming that it has no jurisdiction of such issues, the appellate authority also made it clear that the prescribed authority, too, had no jurisdiction.
Following such an observation, the DM [South] issued a fresh notice on 01 December, 2011 reopening the seal on the building and providing Melli Sonam with 30 days to approach the appropriate court and seek remedy on the notice [issued by the DM’s office] to vacate the premises.
Following this, Mr. Bhutia is now challenging this order of the DM in the High Court.
The DM South had further detailed that should Mr. Bhutia fail to approach the appropriate court within the prescribed 30 days and receive directions suggesting otherwise, another sealing order will be issued and the house could be sealed again.