The Petitioners, including two members from the J.J. Cluster, argued that the demolition, and the consequent eviction of 5000 slum dwellers was totally illegal and contrary to the guidelines laid down in various Supreme Court and High Court decisions. It even contradicts the Delhi Slum and J.J. Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015,which stipulates that slums established before 1st January, 2006 shall not be removed, without providing them with alternative housing.
In a judgment running into 104 pages, the Delhi High Court held that “the right to housing is a bundle of rights not limited to a bare shelter over one‘s head. It includes the right to livelihood, right to health, right to education and right to food, including right to clean drinking water, sewerage and transport facilities”. The Court further held that the law no longer views slum dweller as an ‘illegal occupant’ or ‘an encroacher’, but as a rights-bearing individual whose rights have to be recognised, protected and enforced.
The Court then laid down a series of steps that have to followed, when any JJ cluster needs to be removed. The first step would be to assess whether the slum dwellers are eligible for rehabilitation as per the law and policy, otherwise any eviction or demolition would be illegal. The High Court categorically observed that “forced eviction of jhuggi dwellers, unannounced, in co-ordination with the other agencies, and without compliance with the above steps, would be contrary to the law”.
In its decision, the Court extensively refers to international law, especially the International Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights (‘ICSCER’) which expressly mentions the right to adequate housing and the right against forced evictions. Even South African jurisprudence on right to shelter and housing has been cited, which held that “even when unlawfulness of occupation is established, the eviction process is not automatic, and the Courts will have to exercise broad judicial discretion in deciding what is just and equitable in the particular circumstances”. In this context, the High Court also refers to the ‘right to the city’, wherein it means that “right to access several facets that preserve the capability of a person to enjoy the freedom to live in a city,” which has been incubated in the international human rights law on housing.
In effect, this is a landmark decision by the High Court, which is especially relevant in the context of rapid urbanisation wherein thousands of citizens are migrating to cities and facing acute affordable housing facilities. The arbitrary demolition of jhuggis is a perennial problem in cities like Delhi, wherein more and more gated colonies and housing societies are only interested in segregating the poor and working class from their surroundings, and relocating them to outskirts of the cities, lacking proper infrastructure and involving long distances. J. Murlidhar’s elucidation of ‘right to city’ will go a long way in how we reimagine our cities, where all working persons can enjoy a dignified life, with shelter on her head, and food on her plate. (IPA Service)
INDIA: LEGAL WATCH
JUDGMENT AGAINST ILLEGAL DEMOLITION OF SLUMS HAS BIG SIGNIFICANCE
‘RIGHT TO SHELTER’ MOVEMENT GETS A MAJOR BOOST
Amritananda Chakravorty - 2019-03-27 10:27
On 18th March, 2019, the High Court at Delhi gave a path-breaking judgment on the arbitrary eviction of slum dwellers, and upheld their right to housing. In this case, the division bench of Delhi High Court, i.e., Justice S. Murlidhar and Justice Vibhu Bhakru, was hearing a petition filed by Ajay Maken, Congress leader, who had challenged the forced eviction of around 5000 dwellers of a jhuggi jhopri basti at Shakurbasti on 12th December, 2015. Around 1200 jhuggis were demolished on the orders of the Indian Railways by Delhi Police, leaving thousands of person homeless in severe winter, and also resulted in the death of a six month child.