JOIN THE LCW
COMMUNITY

Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, quarterly analytics report, curated expert talks, merchandise and much more. Support our work!

Sign up today
Conflict database

DDA Sells Kathputli Colony Land, Puppeteers Await Rehabilitation, Risk Losing Livelihood

Reported by

Eleonora Fanari

Legal Review by

Edited by

Updated by

Asmi Sharma

Published on

October 25, 2016

March 4, 2024

Edited on

May 2, 2023

October 25, 2016

State

Delhi

Sector

Infrastructure

People Affected by Conflict

16800

Households Affected by Conflict

3500

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

5

ha

Starting Year

2013

Location of Conflict

Kathputli Colony in Shadipur Depot

West Delhi

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Township/Real Estate

Commercial Centre

Land Conflict Summary

In New Delhi's Kathputli colony -- named for its high population of puppeteers -- homes of thousands of folk artistes have been demolished in lieu of a contentious in-situ rehabilitation and redevelopment project.
Kathputli Colony is touted to be the world's largest settlement of street performers. Folk artistes from Rajasthan had settled on this land in the1950s. Soon artistes and performers from other states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh followed suit, as land became increasingly available in the area. With time, the initial temporary settlements were transformed into a colony.
In 2007, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) sold the land to Raheja Developers as part of a Public Private Partnership project for the in-situ redevelopment of the area. In 2009, Raheja Developers announced the construction of Raheja Phoenix, a mega skyscraper housing [54 floors of luxury flats](https://cprindia.org/sites/default/files/working_papers/The Case of Kathputli Colony_CPRWorkingPaper (2)_1.pdf), on the Kathputli Colony plot. According to the plan, the residents of the colony needed to be temporarily relocated. For this purpose, the DDA established 2,800 temporary houses in a camp in Anand Parbat and another 492 lodgings in North-West Delhi’s Narela, five and 30 kilometres away, respectively. Later, within a time frame of three to five years, they were to be relocated to low-cost housing in the same area (2,800 apartments in six towers of 15 storeys each), next to Raheja Phoenix.
From 2013 onwards, when the residents of the colony found out about their potential eviction, they put up a stiff resistance. In March 2014, the DDA and local police forcefully entered the colony with bulldozers attempting to evict several residents. Many were injured, and the police slapped false charges on 23 people. On the night of August 11, 2014, Dilip Bhat, the chief of the colony, was allegedly picked up from his house and beaten up by the police.
In 2017, around 400 _jhuggis (slums) _in the colony were demolished by the DDA amidst protests by the residents. A report described the area as a "war torn" place. The police resorted to lathicharge and tear gas. According to the DDA officials, notices informing the residents of the impending demolition had been sent out ahead of time; the residents, on the other hand, denied receiving any such notification.
The two controversial aspects of the conflict are the modalities of the the rehabilitation and the incorrect number of families recognised as residents of the colony by the DDA (2,800 families against the 3,500 claimed by the people).
The colony continues to fight for its land. The residents have submitted numerous complaints and letters against the DDA, MLAs and MPs. After the relocation was complete in 2017, the families continued to struggle adjusting to the transit camps. Many decried the camps to be considerably smaller than promised, lacking proper water supply and sanitation facilities. In 2020, during the lockdown, the transit camps were hit by acute food shortage with residents struggling to access daily ration. While they continue their wait for permanent housing, many have been compelled to seek the help of social media to continue their performances. Others have resorted to odd jobs, unable to pursue their livelihood as artistes.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for rehabilitation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

What was the action taken by the police?

Detention

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Released from detention

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

No

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

No

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Sections 186, 353, 34, 308

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

1. In February 2017, 3 FIR were filed against two activists involved in the community mobilisation and the Pradhan of Kathputli. Those named in the FIR were not aware that any FIR had been lodged or the crime they were accused of. Amit Kumar, an activist from NAPM said that he was only made aware of the FIR two months later when the police called him to the station for investigation and learned that the police had filed an FIR against him and two others for causing harm to a DDA official by throwing a shoe at him. Amit also noted that of the three persons against whom the FIRs had been filed, one of the people named in the FIR had not even been present at the public meeting. As part of the investigation, the police reached out to all three for their testimonies, they were called them to the police station every two-three months till October 2017, but no chargesheet was filed. After the demolitions in October 2017, the police did not pursue the matter any further. The FIR mentioned Section 186, Section 353, Section 34 2. A schism had formed between a small faction of residents that voluntarily accepted rehabilitation in 2014 & prior and a larger majority that refused rehabilitation. The protesting residents and activists often found themselves under physical attack and constant harassment from this group. Himshi, an activist involved with the anti-eviction protests recalled an incident when they were protesting outside the DDA office and the police called up members of the other group inciting them to come to attack the protestors outside the DDA office. As the protestors were being attacked, the police present at the scene did not intervene. As a result, Himshi and another resident approached the Court and were granted police protection in the basti. 3. In 2017, male police were entering the homes of residents after 7:00 pm and threatening them to sign on the eviction slips. 12 female residents filed complaints with Ranjith Nagar Police Station SHO. 4. In March 2014, the DDA and local police forcefully entered the colony with bulldozers attempting to evict several residents. As per media reports, the police used tear gas on the residents and many were injured. On the night of August 11, 2014, Dilip Bhat, the chief of the colony, was allegedly picked up from his house and beaten up by the police. The police also slapped charges on 23 people who were subsequently charged under Section 308 of the IPC (attempt to commit culpable homicide). https://thewire.in/uncategorised/kathputli-colony-relocation.  5. Residents and activists involved in organising community meetings were arbitrarily detained between December 2016 - October 2017. As an intimidation tactic family members and young men of community organisers were picked up by police and taken to the police station and released within a few hours.  6. An activist that tried to stop the demolition after receiving the Court's stay order was roughed up and picked up from Kathputli and taken to the police station where he was held for a few hours. When his brother arrived at the police station, he was told that his brother was not there. He was released after the SHO received calls from a few senior activists in the country. 

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

1. Amit Kumar, NAPM 2. Himshi, NAPM 3. Annie Raja, NFIW

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Religious/Sacred/Cultural value

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

₹

254.27

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

2009

Page Number In Investment Document:

5

Has the Conflict Ended?

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Central/State Government Policy

Legislations/Policies Involved

Notification S.O. 141 (E), Master Plan for Delhi 2021, Ministry of Urban Development dated February 7, 2007
Clause e [The DDA shall undertake projects for in-situ slum rehabilitation, including using land as a resource for private sector participation]
Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015
Clause 2(a)(iv) [The DUSIB can take over any JJ Basti on the model of the Kathputli Colony for in-situ redevelopment]

  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Non-rehabilitation of displaced people

Forced evictions/dispossession of land

Legal Status:

Out of Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Case Number

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

Physical attack

Lathicharge/teargas/pellets

Arrest/detention/imprisonment

Judicial harassment

Displacement

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Yes

Reported Details of the Violation:

1. In March 2014, the DDA and local police forcefully entered the colony with bulldozers attempting to evict several residents. As per media reports, the police used tear gas on the residents and many were injured. The police slapped false charges on 23 people. On the night of August 11, 2014, Dilip Bhat, the chief of the colony, was allegedly picked up from his house and beaten up by the police. 2. During the demolitions in December 2016, men and women were lathi-charged and children were manhandled by the police. 3. Between 2016 and 2017, heavy police force was deployed in the area. During this period 12-13 police people along with 2-3 DDA officials would go into the homes of the residents and coerce them to sign the eviction slips. When the residents would hold public meetings, around 100 policepersons were always present. 4. Between 2016 and October 2017, there were a few instances where residents, mostly young men were picked up from the basti, taken to the police station and released within a few hours. This was used as an intimidation tactic by the police to instil fear in the community and those mobilising and organising protests. Those who were detained were usually family members of the mobilisers. 5. In 2017, around 400 jhuggis (slums) in the colony were demolished by the DDA amidst protests by the residents. The police resorted to lathi-charge and tear gas. Many women were also beaten by the police and few protestor, including residents, activists and reporters were detained at the Ranjith Nagar Police Station.

Date of Violation

October 29, 2017

Location of Violation

Kathputli Colony

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Delhi Development Authority (DDA)

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Raheja Developers

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

No

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Residents of Kathputli Colony

Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

Detention

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Released from detention

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

No

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Sections 186, 353, 34, 308

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

1. In February 2017, 3 FIR were filed against two activists involved in the community mobilisation and the Pradhan of Kathputli. Those named in the FIR were not aware that any FIR had been lodged or the crime they were accused of. Amit Kumar, an activist from NAPM said that he was only made aware of the FIR two months later when the police called him to the station for investigation and learned that the police had filed an FIR against him and two others for causing harm to a DDA official by throwing a shoe at him. Amit also noted that of the three persons against whom the FIRs had been filed, one of the people named in the FIR had not even been present at the public meeting. As part of the investigation, the police reached out to all three for their testimonies, they were called them to the police station every two-three months till October 2017, but no chargesheet was filed. After the demolitions in October 2017, the police did not pursue the matter any further. The FIR mentioned Section 186, Section 353, Section 34 2. A schism had formed between a small faction of residents that voluntarily accepted rehabilitation in 2014 & prior and a larger majority that refused rehabilitation. The protesting residents and activists often found themselves under physical attack and constant harassment from this group. Himshi, an activist involved with the anti-eviction protests recalled an incident when they were protesting outside the DDA office and the police called up members of the other group inciting them to come to attack the protestors outside the DDA office. As the protestors were being attacked, the police present at the scene did not intervene. As a result, Himshi and another resident approached the Court and were granted police protection in the basti. 3. In 2017, male police were entering the homes of residents after 7:00 pm and threatening them to sign on the eviction slips. 12 female residents filed complaints with Ranjith Nagar Police Station SHO. 4. In March 2014, the DDA and local police forcefully entered the colony with bulldozers attempting to evict several residents. As per media reports, the police used tear gas on the residents and many were injured. On the night of August 11, 2014, Dilip Bhat, the chief of the colony, was allegedly picked up from his house and beaten up by the police. The police also slapped charges on 23 people who were subsequently charged under Section 308 of the IPC (attempt to commit culpable homicide). https://thewire.in/uncategorised/kathputli-colony-relocation.  5. Residents and activists involved in organising community meetings were arbitrarily detained between December 2016 - October 2017. As an intimidation tactic family members and young men of community organisers were picked up by police and taken to the police station and released within a few hours.  6. An activist that tried to stop the demolition after receiving the Court's stay order was roughed up and picked up from Kathputli and taken to the police station where he was held for a few hours. When his brother arrived at the police station, he was told that his brother was not there. He was released after the SHO received calls from a few senior activists in the country. 

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Video

Summary
Fact Sheet
Legal Data
Additional
Information
Resources
Images
Videos

In New Delhi's Kathputli colony -- named for its high population of puppeteers -- homes of thousands of folk artistes have been demolished in lieu of a contentious in-situ rehabilitation and redevelopment project.
Kathputli Colony is touted to be the world's largest settlement of street performers. Folk artistes from Rajasthan had settled on this land in the1950s. Soon artistes and performers from other states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh followed suit, as land became increasingly available in the area. With time, the initial temporary settlements were transformed into a colony.
In 2007, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) sold the land to Raheja Developers as part of a Public Private Partnership project for the in-situ redevelopment of the area. In 2009, Raheja Developers announced the construction of Raheja Phoenix, a mega skyscraper housing [54 floors of luxury flats](https://cprindia.org/sites/default/files/working_papers/The Case of Kathputli Colony_CPRWorkingPaper (2)_1.pdf), on the Kathputli Colony plot. According to the plan, the residents of the colony needed to be temporarily relocated. For this purpose, the DDA established 2,800 temporary houses in a camp in Anand Parbat and another 492 lodgings in North-West Delhi’s Narela, five and 30 kilometres away, respectively. Later, within a time frame of three to five years, they were to be relocated to low-cost housing in the same area (2,800 apartments in six towers of 15 storeys each), next to Raheja Phoenix.
From 2013 onwards, when the residents of the colony found out about their potential eviction, they put up a stiff resistance. In March 2014, the DDA and local police forcefully entered the colony with bulldozers attempting to evict several residents. Many were injured, and the police slapped false charges on 23 people. On the night of August 11, 2014, Dilip Bhat, the chief of the colony, was allegedly picked up from his house and beaten up by the police.
In 2017, around 400 _jhuggis (slums) _in the colony were demolished by the DDA amidst protests by the residents. A report described the area as a "war torn" place. The police resorted to lathicharge and tear gas. According to the DDA officials, notices informing the residents of the impending demolition had been sent out ahead of time; the residents, on the other hand, denied receiving any such notification.
The two controversial aspects of the conflict are the modalities of the the rehabilitation and the incorrect number of families recognised as residents of the colony by the DDA (2,800 families against the 3,500 claimed by the people).
The colony continues to fight for its land. The residents have submitted numerous complaints and letters against the DDA, MLAs and MPs. After the relocation was complete in 2017, the families continued to struggle adjusting to the transit camps. Many decried the camps to be considerably smaller than promised, lacking proper water supply and sanitation facilities. In 2020, during the lockdown, the transit camps were hit by acute food shortage with residents struggling to access daily ration. While they continue their wait for permanent housing, many have been compelled to seek the help of social media to continue their performances. Others have resorted to odd jobs, unable to pursue their livelihood as artistes.

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for rehabilitation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

Total investment involved (in Crores):

₹

254.27

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

2009

Page Number In Investment Document:

5

Has the Conflict Ended?

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Central/State Government Policy

Legislations/Policies Involved

Notification S.O. 141 (E), Master Plan for Delhi 2021, Ministry of Urban Development dated February 7, 2007
Clause e [The DDA shall undertake projects for in-situ slum rehabilitation, including using land as a resource for private sector participation]
Delhi Slum & JJ Rehabilitation and Relocation Policy, 2015
Clause 2(a)(iv) [The DUSIB can take over any JJ Basti on the model of the Kathputli Colony for in-situ redevelopment]

  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Non-rehabilitation of displaced people

Forced evictions/dispossession of land

Legal Status:

Out of Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

Case Number

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

Physical attack

Lathicharge/teargas/pellets

Arrest/detention/imprisonment

Judicial harassment

Displacement

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Yes

Reported Details of the Violation:

1. In March 2014, the DDA and local police forcefully entered the colony with bulldozers attempting to evict several residents. As per media reports, the police used tear gas on the residents and many were injured. The police slapped false charges on 23 people. On the night of August 11, 2014, Dilip Bhat, the chief of the colony, was allegedly picked up from his house and beaten up by the police. 2. During the demolitions in December 2016, men and women were lathi-charged and children were manhandled by the police. 3. Between 2016 and 2017, heavy police force was deployed in the area. During this period 12-13 police people along with 2-3 DDA officials would go into the homes of the residents and coerce them to sign the eviction slips. When the residents would hold public meetings, around 100 policepersons were always present. 4. Between 2016 and October 2017, there were a few instances where residents, mostly young men were picked up from the basti, taken to the police station and released within a few hours. This was used as an intimidation tactic by the police to instil fear in the community and those mobilising and organising protests. Those who were detained were usually family members of the mobilisers. 5. In 2017, around 400 jhuggis (slums) in the colony were demolished by the DDA amidst protests by the residents. The police resorted to lathi-charge and tear gas. Many women were also beaten by the police and few protestor, including residents, activists and reporters were detained at the Ranjith Nagar Police Station.

Date of Violation

October 29, 2017

Location of Violation

Kathputli Colony

Nature of Protest

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Delhi Development Authority (DDA)

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Raheja Developers

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Residents of Kathputli Colony

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Documented By

Text Link

Reviewed By

Text Link

Updated By

Text Link

Edited By

Text LinkLand Conflict Watch

Other Land Conflicts in Delhi

You can read our past newsletters here

Your privacy and security are of utmost importance to us. Read our ‘Privacy Policy’ for information on how your data is used.

Company

About UsWork with usNewslettersReport a ConflictContact UsHolding Ground 2022Conflicts DatabaseOngoing ResearchPublicationsClosed Conflicts

Social

TwitterInstagramFacebookLinkedin

Legal

Code to Combat Sexual Harassment and Discrimination
Policy for a Healthy Work EnvironmentIC Order
Privacy PolicyData Sharing PolicyTerms and ConditionsRefund Policy

Get in Touch!

contact@landconflictwatch.org

© 2023 Nut Graph LLP
All Rights Reserved.

cross

For LCW Members

tick
Monthly Natural Resource Policy Brief will reach your inbox on Monday, 31st May, 2023.
tick
Interaction with our policy brief writer will be held on Tuesday, 13th June, 2023.
Not a member yet?
Sign up now