Skip to main content

A Supreme Court 'narrative'? Hutment dwellers, urban poor are illegal encroachers

Counterview Desk

Calling the August 31 Supreme Court direction to demolish within the next three months over 48,000 homes of the urban poor in Delhi as “complete violation of the principles of natural justice", the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) has regretted, the apex court does not provide any judicial reasoning as to why this is necessary in a case addressing the issue of managing disposal of plastics and other waste.
In a statement, Ravi Kiran Jain, president, and Dr V Suresh, general secretary, PUCL, say, the order to demolish so many houses without hearing them or bothering to ensure that they would be rehabilitated first is also a violation of the slum-dwellers’ right to earn a livelihood and live with basic human dignity. 

Text:

People Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) expresses its disappointment at the decision of the Supreme Court of India dated August 31, 2020 in MC Mehta v Union Of India & Ors (Writ Petition No. 13029/1985), and condemns the direction to demolish within the next three months over 48,000 homes of the urban poor in Delhi as being in complete violation of the principles of natural justice.
The order of the Court is a summary decision on the fate of tens of thousands of families -- without any consideration of their right to live a life with basic human dignity and a roof over their head. 
While the Supreme Court has ordered that within the first three months those structures in “safe zones” should be first demolished, there is no clarity as to how many are in these safe zones and thus are under immediate threat. In any case the Supreme Court’s order is clear- all 48,000 structures have to be demolished very soon.
In a petition filed originally to rein in pollutants from vehicular emissions, the Supreme Court has directed that slums located around train stations in Delhi should be demolished within three months. There is no mention about rehabilitation of those whose houses are to be demolished; so much so, the issue of whether and if rehabilitation will at all take place, and if so, by when, where, how and who will be responsible for the rehabilitation is totally unclear.
This is notwithstanding the fact that it is settled law, that forced eviction of slum dwellers, unannounced, without securing alternate rehabilitation for them, would be contrary to the law. It is by now well recognised that the urban poor have a “right to the city”, as the NCT of Delhi survives on their blood, sweat and tears.
Just recently in April-May 2020, Delhi, as also other cities, witnessed the tragedy of mass forced exodus of lakhs of migrant workers due to the Covid-19 induced economic crisis. The sight of lakhs of workers walking thousands of kms home exposed not just the apathy of the elites and the governing classes, but also highlighted how much cities and economies are dependent on these workers.
The enhanced sensitivity to the plight of urban migrant poor has however been chimeral and transient; even as Covid-19 pandemic still rages, nothing seems to have changed with the right to housing and basic dignity of urban poor once again sought to be summarily denied to those who actually build and run the city daily and therefore have an equal stake in it.
In its order, the Supreme Court makes reference to an order of the National Green Tribunal (NGT) dated October 1, 2018, passed in an application praying for the prohibition of use, sale, carrying or dumping of any plastic product on the Indian railways stations, but failed to note that even in October 2018, the NGT had recorded that the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board had been allocated a budget of only Rs 11.25 crore for rehabilitation of slum dwellers residing besides railway track and only 257 families were rehabilitated.
However, the Supreme Court passed further orders to demolish 48,000 slums, without any information about the present status of the rehabilitation of these slum-dwellers. In fact, the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board was not even a party to the Writ Petition and could not clarify the extent out the scale of the rehabilitation challenge of 48,000 families who houses the SC has ordered to be demolished.
Evidently, the Supreme Court only relied upon the affidavit of the Railways, which is not even formally a party to the Writ Petition, to pass such sweeping orders condemning tens of thousands of poor families to homelessness.
Another aspect of the SC ruling which causes greater anguish and is to be deprecated is the further direction that no Court can stay these demolitions for any reason whatsoever.
By putting an embargo on grant of stay by other courts of the demolitions and by rendering the interim orders of protection granted by courts ineffective, the Supreme Court has effectively taken away the right of access to remedy of the affected people without even granting them a chance of hearing.
This is completely against the principles of natural justice and a violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
What is most peculiar is that order itself does not provide any judicial reasoning as to why it is necessary to demolish 48,000 homes in a case addressing the issue of managing disposal of plastic and other waste in stations.
While the report of the Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority held that the Indian Railways is not in compliance with the Municipal Solid Waste Management Rules 2016, the Supreme Court has not passed any directions against the Railways, or the Transportation Corporation of Delhi or the Ministry of Transport, who are parties to the Writ Petition, to ensure that the Indian Railways comply with the Solid Waste Management Rules. Alternative measures ensuring better waste disposal through alternative means avoiding demolition of homes was not even considered while passing the ruling.
It should be pointed out that Writ Petition 13029/1985 is a case kept in cold storage for 35 years. In all these years, no real and effective solutions to the ecological problems raised in the PIL has been taken up. By order dated November 4, 2019, without hearing from a single farmer, the Supreme Court held all farmers in Punjab and Haryana to be the culprits behind the air pollution in the city due to their alleged practice of stubble burning.
Rs 11.25 crore were allocated for rehabilitation of slum dwellers residing besides railway track; only 257 families were rehabilitated
In effect the order denied the right to livelihood of farmers; the order now directing demolition of 48,000 dwellers, without hearing them or bothering to ensure that they would be rehabilitated first is a complete violation of the slum-dwellers’ right to earn a livelihood and live with basic human dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The present order of the Supreme Court appears to be a continuation of the narrative that hutment-dwellers and the urban poor are illegal encroachers, who are not entitled to basic dignities. This is despite the fact courts have, in the `Sudama Singh’ judgment (2010) held that persons aggrieved by forced evictions should not be considered to be encroachers‘ and illegal occupants of land and instead the agencies should first determine if the dwellers are eligible for rehabilitation in terms of the extant law and policy.
The Delhi HC Bench (of Justices S. Muralidhar and Vibhu Bhakru) in Ajay Maken vs Union of India (2019), relating to evictions of 5,000 slum dwellers on railway land, held that proper enumeration was not undertaken of the dwellers whose houses were demolished, and that `Right to Adequate Housing and Rehabilitation’ cannot be denied to jhuggi jhopri dwellers in Delhi’s railway lands.
The principles laid out in the SC judgment in Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation’ (1985) pertaining to natural justice, the protection of the right to livelihood and the protections against arbitrariness should not only extend against the State, but should be applicable to slum-dwellers who will be aggrieved by the present order of the SC.
Coercive orders requiring the eviction of slum dwellers should not have been passed without giving the slum-dwellers in question an opportunity to be heard. In order to redress the situation, it is imperative that the rights of the slum-dwellers be protected, and the Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board should intervene in WP No. 13029/1985 and seek suitable modification of the order dated 31.08.2020, such that the interests of the slum-dwellers are considered by the court, and no demolitions are undertaken without the effective rehabilitation of the slum-dwellers being completed first.
The demolition order has been passed when there is massive spread of COVID in Delhi. The evictions of 48,000 dwellers when the monsoons have not yet ended and with harsh Delhi winters just a few months away will unleash a worse and more horrifying scenario of mass spread of COVID with devastating consequences.
PUCL urges the Supreme Court to reconsider and review its order and protect the rights of the slum-dwellers instead of pushing them towards poverty and homelessness. The Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board and the Delhi Government must take immediate steps to protect the rights of the slum-dwellers and to come up with a rehabilitation plan for the slum-dwellers in consultation with them, before any demolitions are initiated.
PUCL reiterates that no decision concerning the fate of the slum-dwellers and regarding the impending demolition or implementation of the Supreme Court order should be taken without giving an opportunity of fair hearing to the slum-dwellers and ensuring protection of their rights.

Comments

TRENDING

Ganga world's second most polluted river, Modi's Varanasi tops microplastics pollution

By Rajiv Shah  Will the new report by well-known elite NGO Toxics Link create a ripple in the powerful corridors of Delhi? Titled “Quantitative analysis of microplastics along River Ganga”, forwarded to Counterview, doesn’t just say that Ganga is the second most polluted river in the world, next only to Yangtze (China). It goes ahead to do a comparison of microplastics pollution in three cities shows Varanasi – the Lok Sabha constituency of Prime Minister Narendra Modi – is more polluted compared to Kanpur and Haridwar.

How real is Mamata challenge to Modi? Preparing for 2024 'khela hobey' moment

By Prof Ujjwal K Chowdhury*  Third time elected West Bengal Chief Minister, Mamata Banerjee is on a whirlwind tour of Delhi, meeting everyone who matters within and beyond the government, the Prime Minister, the President, some Cabinet ministers, Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, several other opposition leaders, et al.

Did Modi promote Dholavira, a UNESCO site now, as Gujarat CM? Facts don't tally

By Rajiv Shah  As would generally happen, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s tweet – that not only was he “absolutely delighted” with the news of UNESCO tag to Dholavira, but he “ first visited ” the site during his “student days and was mesmerised by the place” – is being doubted by his detractors. None of the two tweets, strangely, even recalls once that it’s a Harappan site in Gujarat.

UP arrest of 'terrorists': Diverting attention from Covid goof-up, Ram temple land scam?

By Advocate Mohammad Shoaib, Sandeep Pandey* That corruption is rampant in police department is a common experience. However, there is another form of corruption which devastates lives of individuals and their families. It has now emerged as a common phenomenon that police more often than not register false cases because of which individuals have to spend number of years in jail.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

If not Modi, then who? Why? I (an ordinary citizen) am there! Main hoon naa!

By Mansee Bal Bhargava*  The number of women ministers is doubled in early July from the first term after cabinet reshuffle by the present government led by Narendra Modi. While there were 06 women ministers in the previous term, this term there are 11. The previous two governments led by Dr Manmohan Singh had 10 women ministers in each tenure. Are these number of women ministers something to rejoice in the near 75 years of independence? Yes maybe, if we think that things are slowly improving in the patriarchal system. This change is less likely to achieve gender balance in the parliament otherwise we require more than 11 as per the 33% reservation . This change is also less likely because the men politicians’ inability to handle the country’s mess is becoming more and more evident and especially during the corona crisis. Seems, the addition of more women ministers may be a result of the recent assembly elections where women played a decisive role in the election results. For example

Buddhist shrines massively destroyed by Brahmanical rulers in "pre-Islamic" era: Historian DN Jha's survey

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Effluent discharge into deep sea? Modi told to 'reconsider' Rs 2275 crore Gujarat project

Counterview Desk  In a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, well-known Gujarat-based environmentalist, Mahesh Pandya of the Paryavaran Mitra, has protested against the manner in with the Gujarat government is continuing with its deep sea effluent disposal project despite environmental concerns.

Khorigaon demolition: People being 'brutally' evicted, cops 'restricting' food, water

By Ishita Chatterjee, Neelesh Kumar, Manju Menon, Vimal Bhai* On July 23, the Faridabad Municipal Corporation told the Supreme Court that they have cleared 74 acres out of 150 acres. Despite the affidavit of the Municipal Corporation, the court, on the complaint of various litigants, that the arrangements for living, food etc. have not been made for the people. 

Giant conglomerates 'favoured': Whither tribal rights for jal-jungle-jameen?

Prafull Samantara By Mohammad Irshad Ansari*  The struggle for “Jal, Jungle and Jameen” has been a long-drawn battle for the tribal communities of India. This tussle was once again in the limelight with the proposed diamond mining in the Buxwaha forest of Chhatarpur (Madhya Pradesh). The only difference in this movement was the massive social media support it gained, which actually seems to tilt the scale for the tribal people in a long time.