[Urbanstudy] Nangla Machi

[diya at sarai.net]

Query about the post - in two other demolitions that are happening shortly,
the MCD has

1) given one slum plots with assigned numbers 
2) promised plots to another (this appears to be habitual practice, and in
the past has yielded plots).

I'm curious to know why Nangla Machi is the exception. Was any reason
given? Is it directly because of the court order?

Best

Diya Mehra




On 6:43:19 pm 04/07/06 Sanjay Srivastava <sanjays at deakin.edu.au> wrote:
>
> For those of you interested in what's happening in Nangla Machi, it
> now appears that no one from there -- whether settled before or after
> 1990 -- will be able to get a plot in a 'resettlement' colony
> elsewhere. The recent  round of demolitions at the end of March, when
> some 1100-1200 structures were torn down, had raised hopes among the
> owners of those left standing that they had been spared because their
> papers were 'in order'. However, a recent meeting with some officials
> at the MCD Slum Wing suggests that no one might be eligible, and that
> the rest of the locality will be demolished without any notice being
> given. The latter is done (and a 'Demolition Slip' issued) when the
> persons to be displaced are to be offered plots elsewhere. It appears
> that in its most recent say on the matter (5th March), the High Court
> is completely silent on the issue of alternative plots to the
> residents. It has merely issued instructions that the land be cleared
> by the 17th of May. Of course, I hope this information is wrong.
>
> Around mid-March (2006) when another 'Survey' was being carried out,
> some of the houses were marked 'P-98', and many such houseowners felt
> relieved as they assumed that 'P' indicated 'Permanent'. Sadly, it
> meant 'Post-1998', and at the end of March they watched in
> bewilderment as their houses were knocked down along with the others.
> During the March survey, many were concerned that the fact that their
> houses were not being 'surveyed' meant that they were in danger.
> However, they were told that this was a good thing and that only
> those being surveyed had cause for concern since this was a survey of
> 'illegal' structures. In fact, it now doesn't appear that any of the
> numbering or signage system (around seven different types) allocated
> to various structures over the past few years has anything to do with
> the firmness of claim over land. Only the ways of devising varying
> systems of classification is permanent. The vast collection of
> 'proofs' people have gathered in order to signify themselves appear
> all to have come to nought.
>
> Sanjay Srivastava
> _______________________________________________
> 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