Response to Public Notice; Objection (30/03/2003)

Land Acquisition Collector (NW)
Office of Deputy Commissioner (NW),
Village Kanjhawala, Delhi – 110081

Sub: Public Notice for land acquisition for ‘resettlement of JJ clusters’ in Bhalaswa, Jahangirpuri (No. F 11(24)/ 98/ LBD/ LA/ 19349, dated 4/3/2003 in Hindustan, 07.03.2003, p.7): Objection

Ref: Copy of my letter of 23rd March 2003 to Secretary MoUD, as objection (enclosed)


In continuation of my letter under reference, I wish to add that objections therein are not raised purely from a general planned development perspective, but also as one affected in terms of the following:

  1. Government’s policy for slum resettlement instead of low-income housing according to the statutory Master Plan is getting in the way of the solution to the slum problem in my city. I consider land acquisition at public expense for it objectionable on grounds of infringement of my right to a squalor free city, guaranteed to me by the Master Plan.
  2. Government’s resettlement schemes at city outskirts spare land meant for low-income families under the Master Plan within the city for up-market uses that stress infrastructure. I find land acquisition for them at public cost objectionable on grounds of abetting infringement of my right to infrastructure, especially water, carrying capacity based development, guaranteed to me by the Master Plan.
  3. The public notice does not specify which slums are to be resettled to Bhalaswa and could be relating to settlements in my area. The Master Plan guarantees me balanced development in my neighbourhood, inclusive of housing for service providers such as hawkers and domestic help. I consider land acquisition at public cost for resettling them far instead of settling them here according to Plan objectionable on grounds of certainty of adding to my expenses as they will pass on part of the burden of costs of commuting, etc, to me. And also, in view of recent CBI findings besides earlier instances, on grounds of likelihood of DDA building flats in violation of the Plan on the land cleared, which will exacerbate the water crisis in this duly notified critical area.
  4. Government’s resettlement schemes have been reportedly found inadequate by their intended beneficiaries as well as by central government, Delhi government and MCD and held by the Court to be lacking in any basis in law and serving no useful purpose. As a citizen I consider land acquisition and public expenditure for such schemes objectionable on grounds of it being wasteful and at the cost of purposeful development for citizens.

Thanking you

Yours sincerely


Gita Dewan Verma