"A Humane Problem”: Supreme Court Urges DDA To Consider Plea Of Sarojini Nagar Jhuggi Dwellers

Terming it as a “humane problem”, the Supreme Court of India on Tuesday(April 11) urged the Delhi Development Authority to take steps to consider the plight of jhuggi dwellers from Delhi’s Sarojini Nagar.

A Bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna orally requested the Additional Solicitor General to "make use of his good offices" to solve the issue.  "It's a humane problem. We have to see it in that way", the bench commented.

The bench was considering a petition filed by jhuggi dwellers from Sarojini Nagar against the demolition/ eviction orders without rehabilitation or relocation of the Slum Dwellers. The SLP was filed challenging the order passed by the Division Bench of Delhi High Court refusing to interfere with Single Judge's order declining to provide Rehabilitation/ Relocation of the Slum Dwellers residing in Jhuggis of Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi.

As per the High Court’s order, in order to avail the Rehabilitation under the Delhi Slum and JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015, the respective Jhuggi Jhopri Basti would have to be notified by the nodal agency Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board.

About a year ago, the Top Court had asked the Central Government to desist from taking coercive steps to evict the jhuggi dwellers in question.

During the hearing, the Bench heard Senior Advocate Vikas Singh and ASG KM Natraj.

Singh argued that even if the Jhuggi dwellers haven’t been notified, they have been occupying the land for long. Going through the relevant paragraphs in the Delhi High High Court order in the Ajay Maken case which discussed the right of rehabilitation, Singh pointed to the Court's observation that Jhuggi dwellers shouldn't be treated as secondary citizens.

Relying on another Gujarat High Court order, Singh further stated that the right to shelter extends to pavement dwellers also. “The High Court said that you can't just ask them to leave one day”

“It's a very noble idea”, remarked Justice Joseph.

“That's why urban planning is important”, said Singh.

“As against the overriding public interest to take that land….you have to locate them somewhere else. Again, it has to be on public land. There will be a constant shifting. Will that be an absolute fundamental right?”, Justice Joseph queried. Singh’s answer was yes.

“Unfortunately, in big cities, there is no slum development with proper transportation and hygienic facilities”, he said while adding that this is a problem in the urban areas.

He continued to argue that the State should be vigilant and not allow encroachment. On the other hand, if it continues to provide government identification to the slum dwellers then they are eligible to be rehabilitated.

“That's the State’s duty. When someone is trying to do that, they should be immediately removed. If you issue them Aadhaar cards and ration cards, all government identification; then you should relocate them to a place that's appropriate for them”.

At this point, Justice Nagarathna asked a pertinent question – Are the slum dwellers willing to be relocated? The judge also shed light on the plausible reasons on migration to the cities.

“We have heard of many Awas Yojanas. In Karnataka, we have this Ashraya Yojana. They have to be relocated. It’s a continuous process. Migration to the cities is because there's no economic activity in villages. In fact in villages in Karnataka, there are only senior citizens and children. All other able-bodied persons are out in the cities”.

ASG Natraj then began his submissions. He informed that it won’t be possible to rehabilitate each and every jhuggi dweller. “There's a huge scarcity of the land in Delhi”.

He further stated that the scheme in question was never challenged before the Delhi High Court also. “It’s beneficiary structured scheme. Given the demography of Delhi, it’s a service”, the ASG said.

Along with stating the history of the land, he handed over a map to the Bench.

“We thought Sarojini Nagar is a small place, but it's 235 acres with over 136 families”, the Bench exclaimed.

After going through the law, the Bench said that it is not possible to have a jhuggi outside of a ‘Jhuggi Jhopri Basthi’.

“It's not a Basthi and therefore, not a jhuggi”, the Bench revealed after discussing with each other.

What happens to jhuggis not in Basthis?, Justice Nagarathna queried.

“They don't get rehabilitation under the Act and the scheme. Only temporary accommodation”, the ASG replied. The Court was of the view that something had to be in favour of the Jhuggi dwellers.

“They grew up there. They are small time people. They don't have a choice”, the Bench orally said before rising for the day.

The matter will be next heard on April 18.

Case Title: Vaishali & Ors vs Union of India & Ors