Back
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR
SUDAMA SINGH & OTHERS ..... Petitioners
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
WP(C) Nos.8904/2009, 7735/2007, 7317/2009 and 9246/2009
Decided On : 11th February, 2010
The Court held that the State Government's policy for relocation and rehabilitation excludes the persons living on Right of Way, although they are otherwise eligible for relocation / rehabilitation as per the Scheme. The Court also held that the manner in which the alleged policy is being implemented by the respondents is arbitrary, discriminatory and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and various international covenants to which India is signatory.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking intervention of this Court to rehabilitate and relocate the petitioners who were residing at various slum clusters in the Capital city to a suitable place and providing them alternative land with ownership rights pursuant to demolition of their “jhuggies?” (hutments).
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the decision of the respondents holding that the petitioners are on the “Right of Way” and are, therefore, not entitled to relocation, is hereby declared as illegal and unconstitutional. In terms of the extant policy for relocation of jhuggi dwellers, which is operational in view of the orders of the Supreme Court, the cases of the petitioners will be considered for relocation. Within a period of four months from today, each of those eligible among the petitioners, in terms of the above relocation policy, will be granted an alternative site as per MPD-2021 subject to proof of residence prior to cut-off date. This will happen in consultation with each of them in a “meaningful” manner, as indicated in this judgment. The State agencies will ensure that basic civic amenities, consistent with the rights to life and dignity of each of the citizens in the jhuggies, are available at the site of relocation.
Issues: Whether the State Government’s policy for relocation and rehabilitation excludes the persons living on Right of Way, although they are otherwise eligible for relocation / rehabilitation as per the Scheme? If there is any policy regarding the persons living on Right of Way then what could be the true import of such policy? Whether the manner in which the alleged policy is being implemented by the respondents is arbitrary, discriminatory and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and various international covenants to which India is signatory?
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the stand of the respondents that alternative land is not required to be allotted to the inhabitants of such land which comes under the “Right of Way” is completely contrary to the State’s policy which governs relocation and rehabilitation of slum dwellers. State’s policy for resettlement nowhere exempts persons, who are otherwise eligible for benefit of the said policy, merely on the ground that the land on which they are settled is required for “Right of Way”. The respondents’ have failed to produce any such policy which provides for exclusion of the slum dwellers on the ground that they are living on “Right of Way”. The Court found force in the submission of the petitioners that even if there is any such policy, it may be for those jhuggi dwellers, who deliberately set up their jhuggies on some existing road, footpath etc, but surely this policy cannot be applied to jhuggi dwellers who have been living on open land for several decades and it is only now discovered that they are settled on a land marked for a road under the Master Plan though when they started living on the said land there was no existing road.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the petitions and directed the State agencies to grant an alternative site to each of those eligible among the petitioners, in terms of the relocation policy, within a period of four months from the date of the judgment. The Court also directed the State agencies to ensure that basic civic amenities are available at the site of relocation.
AJIT PRAKASH SHAH, CJ INTRODUCTION
1. The writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking intervention of this Court to rehabilitate and relocate the petitioners who were residing at various slum clusters in the Capital city to a suitable place and providing them alternative land with ownership rights pursuant to demolition of their „jhuggies? (hutments). The subject matter in these four writ petitions revolves around questions of great importance, inter alia, right to shelter of the petitioners and those represented by them on one hand, and, on the other, slum cluster being on „Right of Way? on which basis the agencies of the State seek to oppose them. Therefore, all of them were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
STATE’S POLICY OF RESETTLEMENT OF JHUGGI INHABITANTS
2. Certain background facts, germane to these writ petitions may be noted at the outset. The Government in the year 1990, decided to resettle the then inhabitants of jhuggies in Delhi and a comprehensive survey was conducted by the Civil Supplies Department of Delhi Administration between January and March, 1990, wherein all jhuggi clusters except those residing on road, footpath etc., were identified with the cut-off date of January 31, 1990, pursuant to which a proposal was submitted to the Delhi Administration and the Planning Commission for its 1990-91 Annual Plan. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi mooted a three pronged strategy in its proposal to the Delhi Administration and Planning Commission for Annual Plan, 1990-91, to solve the problem of eligible dwellers which, inter alia, provided:
Strategy-I: Relocation of these Jhuggi households where land owning agencies are in a position to implement the projects on the encroached land pockets as per requirements in larger public interest and they submit request to S&JJ Department for clearance the jhuggi cluster for project implementation and also contribute due share towards the resettlement cost. Strategy-II: In-situ upgradation of JJ clusters and informal shelters in case of those encroached land pockets where the land owning agencies issue NOCs to Slum & JJ Department for utilization of land. However the utilization of land under this strategy is linked with clearance of the project by the Technical Committee of the DDA. Strategy-III: Extension of minimum basic Civic amenities for community use under the Scheme of Environmental Improvement in JJ clusters and its component schemes of construction of Pay and Use Janasuvidha complexes containing toilets and baths and also the introduction of mobile toilet vans in the clusters, irrespective of the status of the encroached land till coverage under one of the aforesaid two strategies.
3. The Delhi Government with the approval of Central Government finalized the Rehabilitation and Improvement Scheme, 2000 for Jhuggi Clusters which came into effect from 01.04.2000 and had a cut-off date of 30.11.1998 for the entitlements. The said Scheme was set aside by this Court in the case of Wazirpur Bartan Nirmata Sangh v. Union of India, reported in 103 (2003) DLT 654 but the Supreme Court vide its orders dated 19.02.2003 and 03.03.2003 passed in SLP(C) No. 3166-3167/2003 filed by the Union of India stayed the said order of the High Court. Therefore, the policy is still operative today. The policy for relocation of J.J. clusters w.e.f. 01.04.2000, interalia, provided that slums will be relocated only from project sites where specific requests have been received from the land owning agencies and no large scale removal should be resorted to without any specific use. Relocation land will be identified in Delhi and NCR in consultation with DDA and NCRPB so that it is in conformity with the land use policy under the Master Plan and the NCR Plan. Land to be acquired will be identified by DDA/NCRPB in small pockets near existing residential areas so that the cost of periphe
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
