Author: Luv Puri
Publication: The Hindu
Date: March 12, 2003
URL: http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2003/03/12/stories/2003031201911300.htm
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court
has directed the authorities concerned to grant benefits to refugees from
Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) similar to those being provided to other
displaced persons in the country.
The order was passed on a petition
filed by displaced persons of 1947, who were forced to migrate to this
part of the State from Kotli, Bhimber, Mirpur, Muzaffarabad and parts of
Poonch, now in PoK.
Unlike refugees from other parts
of Pakistan, those from PoK were denied compensation for the property they
left behind.
Most of them have settled in the
Jammu region, while some took refuge in Delhi and Himachal Pradesh.
The refugees were denied compensation
as the Centre took a stand that PoK belonged to India, implying these would
be able to get back their property some day.
The petitioners sought similar treatment
as provided to the displaced persons from West Pakistan and East Bengal,
now Bangladesh.
The court admitted the petition
and, in the meantime, said that the directions already given in the Public
Interest Litigation petition filed by Sharnarthi Action Committee on August
2, 2002 by the Division Bench be implemented in respect of the members
of SOS, an organisation of PoK refugees.
On August 2 last, acting on a PIL,
the Division Bench had observed that the Government had taken steps with
a view to provide compensation to those persons who had left their property
in West Pakistan.
"The aforesaid Act doesn't indicate
that it doesn't apply to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, but the definition
of `displaced persons' would make it apparent that this Act applies only
to those persons who left their property in West Pakistan.
As PoK is not being treated as part
of West Pakistan, therefore, this Act would not be applicable to Jammu
and Kashmir so far as the displaced persons from PoK are concerned."
The Bench observed that this benefit
was deprived to the displaced persons represented by the petitioners' association
on the basis of a political decision. "This is a decision on which this
court is not supposed to give judgment but the hard reality of life is
that there is a remote possibility of those who have migrated from this
part of the State coming and re-claiming their property."
The court observed that displaced
persons should not be left to sustain themselves in the hope that some
day they would go back and claim their property. "Something concrete is
to be done for the welfare and uplift of those who, as per respondents,
have been displaced from an area which is still being treated as part of
this State and an integral part of the country." This was a matter on which
a decision had to be taken by the respondents.
If an Act could be framed for other
displaced persons, why should displaced person from PoK be deprived of
such a benefit?
In this situation, the court said,
it could only suggest that the Union Government frame a policy and take
steps to mitigate the woes of those still being treated as displaced persons
in their own country.
