A ZANU PF-affiliated housing project heaved a sigh of relief after the court barred a rival group from evicting homeseekers settled at Railway Farm in Kadoma, Mashonaland West province.
The beneficiaries were allocated stands at the farm in 2014.
High Court judge Justice Emy Tsanga granted a provisional order to the youths barring those who had sought to evict them pending finalisation of the matter.
Justice Tsanga also ordered the youths to stay at the farm until they are evicted by a court order.
The Youth Lodgers Association, Kadoma Women Caucus and Green Hood Park Housing Scheme had dragged the Zimbabwe Youth Promotion Corporation and the Minister of Local Government and Public Works to court over the matter.
According to an affidavit filed by the applicants represented by Tsitsi Mutariswa, sometime in August 2014, the associations were allocated 70 hectares at Pixie Combie Farm in Kadoma for residential development.
However, in 2017, the applicants said they approached the Local Government ministry after discovering that another developer was servicing land extending into their area.
They were then advised that they had been allocated 70ha at Railway Farm as compensation for the land they had lost.
- Corruption Watch: Get scared, 2023 is coming
- Corruption Watch: Get scared, 2023 is coming
- Letters: Ensuring Africa’s food security through availability of quality seeds
- Is military's involvement in politics compatible with democracy?
Keep Reading
According to the application, 274 members of the applicants received offer letters for land at Railway Farm, Kadoma, and they moved onto the land for fear of losing their stands like in the previous circumstances, while the council and the Department of Physical Planning was engaged to develop 2 500 stands.
The layout plan was approved and the members started accepting more beneficiaries.
However, according to the court application, on April 8 this year, members of the Youth Promotion Corporation began proceedings to evict the applicants.
Justice Tsanga’s order has now allowed the applicants to continue residing at the farm unless evicted through an order of a competent court, while the respondents were also interdicted from interfering with the applicants housing development scheme.
