[mpisgmedia] Mumbai-Model pilot-project – demand for withdrawal, affidavit, debate

Mumbai-Model pilot-project at Taikhand was announced

Taikhand village is in Okhla Industrial Area. The
proposal is clearly illegal in terms of DMP provisions
for housing, industries and villages and land use of
the area. The model is proposed as
alternative-approach in DMP2021, which makes this
proposal illegal also in terms of Public Notice
provisions of the Act. Connected to court orders for
the riverbed, industries and slums, it also stands out
as a case of misuse of the judicial process. And it
has extra-constitutional origins in disregard of
constitutional controls. All in all, a rare-clarity
snapshot in anomie-icon league of commercial IT Park
on riverbed.

The following is the text of MPISG letter to DDA VC
that will be deposited in Vikas Sadan tomorrow:

After it are links to some previous posts.

---mpisg letter of 08/05/05---

Mr Madhukar Gupta, DDA VC

Sub: Your proposal of Mumbai-Model pilot-project at
Taikhand (reported in press on 07/05/05): Call for
withdrawal and affidavit in WP 5007&09/2002 and debate
with DMP2021 experts

Adequately publicized withdrawal of the above is
sought on following, among other, grounds (The site is
assumed to be near Taikhand village, in sub-zone F8
(Okhla Industrial Area). as per F-Zone Zonal
Development Plan (ZDP)):

1. The proposal is illegal in terms of Delhi Master
Plan (DMP) – amounting to unauthorized colony
development, attracting penalty of rigorous
imprisonment – since it is:

(a) Contrary to DMP housing provisions (being
"alternative approach" in DMP2021, p.280 LHS).

(b) Contrary to DMP industrial use provisions (that
prohibit housing and call for available land to be
used for green buffers and facilities for industries
or relocating non-conforming units)

(c) Contrary to DMP provisions for benefit of villages
(the only DMP residential use in the sub-zone, with
ZDP providing only for their growth in it, ie, only
3000 persons in 1981-2001)

(d) Unmindful of DMP housing backlog and serving to
spare land meant for it in adjoining sub-zones (F1
Friends Colony, F2 Kailash, F7 Okhla, F9 Kalkaji, F18
Tughlakabad, F19 Badarpur) for which ZDP assigns
population of 5 lakh in 2001 (2 lakhs in 1981-2001),
ie, target of about 45000 EWS/LIG units in 2001 (18000
in 1981-2001) – of which less than 10000 have
been developed (as per a DDA affidavit) though
evictions go on (as in Kalkaji Extn at present).

2. The proposal is violative of Plan modification
provisions of the Act, as follows:

(a) This "alternative approach" is proposed in
DMP2021, 90-days for filing objections and suggestions
on which are not over as per Public Notice of

(b) DMP housing / industry / village policy issues
that the proposal impinges are also raised in, and
await consideration of responses to, several s.11A
Public Notices since 2002.

(c) Comprehensive techno-legal objections to it were
raised on DMP2021 "guidelines", which DMP2021 claims
"have duly been considered" (p.258, RHS), calling now
for proof of this.

3. The proposal is unmindful of court orders and
smacks of misuse of judicial process:

(a) In a matter filed also from this industrial area
High Court had quashed Delhi's illegal slum policy by
Order of November 2002 calling for legal policy
– yet to be made – and in the state's SLP
Supreme Court could hardly have allowed illegal 'pilot
projects' instead.

(b) After SLP, petitioners approached High Court for
separate directions in the matter of slums in their
area that Court declined to de-link from policy
– by Order of 03/03/03, by a consequent
direction in which Pushta was cleared, while its main
direction is being disregarded now.

(c) Supreme Court direction of 2002 against commercial
misuse in also this industrial area awaits compliance
– despite mention in Order of May 2004 for
non-conforming units that gave choice of relocating
units as per DMP (including to areas such as this) or
closure and government chose the latter – and
now commercial use, including illegal builder-flats,
is proposed here

4. The proposal emanates from extra-statutory
"control", disregarding Constitutional control:

(a) It is consistent with MoUD/UDM
"suggestion"/"guidelines" outside ambit of s.41 and
with "visions" of GNCTD/CM with no development mandate
save by DMP regime.

(b) It pre-empts scrutiny by Parliamentary Standing
Committee, on whose public notice of 2003, after CBI
exposed a scam at DMP minding levels in DDA, memoranda
against this alternative were filed – in context
of "pilot project" then announced in Vasant Kunj while
the matter of misuse (including by Sahara Restaurant
of same scam) of EWS sites there was sub-judice.

(c) It disregards Planning Commission report of 2002
on Delhi slums that notes the difference between
Mumbai and Delhi and recommends the DMP solution for
Delhi's slum problem.

You would recall the "Mumbai Model" was announced for
Delhi in October 2002 by then UDM at instance of
certain NGOs and a tender inviting NGO-builders for it
was published on 10/12/2002, ie, after and in defiance
of Order of November 2002 in name of which mid-winter
evictions started from Alaknanda amidst celebration of
night shelter initiatives of so-called housing rights
NGOs, which also demanded reinstating the illegal slum
policy in widespread anti-court propaganda. Indeed,
the "Mumbai-model" is being advocated by NGOs as part
of a "package" including also pay-and-use-plots /
round-the-clock-night-shelter to accompaniment of, on
one hand, advancing policy for illegal shoddy projects
by the state to make such options appear better by
comparison and, on the other, direct propaganda
against planning law and professions besides
constitutional systems (request for debate on which
awaits appropriate action on communications forwarded
by Hon'ble President in February 2004). Such
NGOs’ extra-Constitutional proximity with
officialdom are by now as well known as their
de-politicisation proclivities – which seem
striking in the instant case that, in view of the
foregoing, permits portrayal of leaders of immense
stature in all political formations as men of petty

In view of the above, you are also requested to
forthwith arrange the following:

(a) Filing of summary of DDA’s submissions in WP
5007&09/2002 (in which EWS backlog in all of Zone-F is
an issue since Order of November 2003), as ordered in
January 2005 for final hearing / disposal of the
matter, listed on 20/05/2005.

(b) Debate between us and the sub-group on shelter and
general consultants for DMP2021, now that disregard of
our objections raised ever since announcement of
"Mumbai Model" in 2002, and by due process whenever
possible, has extended to infringement of our Public
Notice rights and also in view of the seriousness of
the allegations of complicity that we are now

Rajinder Singh, Convener - Housing

Gita Dewan Verma, Planner

-----some previous posts---

[04/02/03] Mumbai Model for Delhi Slums / clear and
present danger
(has excerpts from objections following announcement
of Mumbai-Model in October-November 2002 and account
of further developments till re-announcement in
February 2003)

[05/02/03] Mid winter evictions - 2002

[07/02/03] Celebrating night shelter – servants,
cops and benefactors

[13/07/03] Mumbai Model in Vasant Kunj!
(has link to news report,

[18/07/03] Slums
(follow-up, in context also of Mumbai-Model
re-announcement, on citizens joint statement on DMP
housing rights, mentioned in post of 13/07/03)

[27/07/03] Demand for assembly discussion on slum
white paper before discussion on co-operative bill

[28/07/03] 'Guidelines' for Delhi's 'third' master

[27/11/03] New improved November Order!
(has text of Order of 12/11/2003 in WP 5007&09/2003
and link to talk about Order of November 2002)

[22/12/03] Mid winter evictions – 2003

[29//01/04] Call for public debate – request to
Parliamentary Standing Committee

[01/02/04] Pushta, river and city betrayed
(start of Pushta posts)

[21/12/04] MCD-ActionAid Night Shelter on Pushta

[29/12/2004] Mid winter evictions - 2004

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around

Partial thread listing: