[Reader-list] Re: [Urbanstudy] Nangla Maachi: Court Proceedings.Note.9th May 2006

[Ravi Agarwal]

The pace of all this leaves me speechless...the language being used  
leaves me dumfounded.....the rationale being provided, the violence  
being inflicted.....The Bhatti mines people have been in touch with  
me and they too are unable to explain what is happening to them. What  
stratergy to employ, what to say which has any meaning, or any  
possibility...

ravi


On May 9, 2006, at 10:05 PM, CM at Nangla wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Today, on May 09, 2006, Hon'ble Justice Ruma Pal and Justice Markhande
> Katju of the Supreme Court, set a time of three weeks for the  
> demolition of
> the remainder of Nangla Maanchi. The half an hour hearing was held  
> in Court
> Number 02 (as item number 16) of the Supreme Court, Barakhamba  
> Road, Delhi,
> from 11:00 AM to 11:30 AM.
>
> The hon'ble bench stated that relocation of all the [remaining]  
> inhabitants
> of Nangla was "not possible" before the demolition. It stated that  
> all it
> could grant Nangla Maanchi was a time of three weeks, before  
> demolition,
> "full stop".
>
> The hon'ble bench stated that the power house, whose land had been
> 'encroached' by the inhabitants of Nangla had given "some date for
> construction", and that there has to be "balance" - that the land  
> has "uses
> that cannot be denied", and that the more settlements are removed, the
> "more they come". On the question of the timeline for this  
> construction,
> the hon'ble bench stated that whatever the case may be, "occupation  
> of land
> without legal authority cannot be allowed. Even people whose lands  
> have
> legal rights have been relocated" for projects.
>
> In response to a request on deliberation on the question of cut-off  
> dates
> for eligibility for relocation, the hon'ble bench stated, "from  
> what was a
> few tenemants" it has grown to "thousands", and "each tenemant had a
> family". They have been "growing and growing", that it was becoming
> difficult to "deal with the problem". It also stated, during the court
> proceedings, that if public land is occupied, it will "have to be  
> vacated",
> that the right to shelter did not mean that "everyone be given  
> shelter".
>
> On the question of Ghewda being without any infrastructure or  
> facilities
> (where the inhabitants of Nangla Maanchi will be temporarily  
> relocated),
> the hon'ble bench stated that in Bawana, a resettlement colony,  
> people had
> sold off their plots of land. On the question of the difficulty of  
> being on
> the streets in this intense heat, the hon'ble bench stated that it is
> "never comfortable to live out", that there will always be intense  
> heat, or
> cold, or rainfall in the city. The hon'ble bench suggested that  
> people need
> not come to Delhi, unless they can afford to live in the city.
>
> Present at the hearing from Ankur/Cybermohalla:
> Sharmila Bhagat (Ankur)
> Shabana (Ankur)
> Avantika (Ankur)
> Shveta Sarda (Sarai/Cybermohalla)
>
> Note-taking by Shveta Sarda
>
> _______________________________________________
> Urbanstudygroup mailing list
> Urban Study Group: Reading the South Asian City
>
> To subscribe or browse the Urban Study Group archives, please visit  
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/urbanstudygroup