Slum clearance authorities and administrative law
Slum Clearance Authorities and Administrative Law
What are Slum Clearance Authorities?
Slum Clearance Authorities (SCAs) are statutory or quasi-governmental bodies established by state governments or municipal corporations to manage, regulate, and execute the redevelopment, rehabilitation, and clearance of slums and informal settlements in urban areas. Their objectives include:
Improving living conditions in slums.
Implementing housing policies.
Providing alternatives or rehabilitation for slum dwellers.
Regulating land use and urban planning.
SCAs operate under specific slum clearance laws, urban development acts, or housing statutes.
Relationship with Administrative Law
Administrative law governs the functioning of public authorities, including SCAs. Key administrative law principles applicable to SCAs include:
Legality: SCAs must act within the powers granted by the law (ultra vires doctrine).
Reasonableness: Their decisions must be reasonable and not arbitrary.
Procedural Fairness (Natural Justice): SCAs must follow due process, including giving notice and hearing to affected persons.
Transparency and Accountability: SCAs are subject to judicial review to ensure they do not abuse power or violate rights.
Protection of Fundamental Rights: Especially the right to livelihood and shelter under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution.
Important Case Laws Related to Slum Clearance Authorities and Administrative Law
1. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985) 3 SCC 545
Issue: Whether the right to livelihood and shelter is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution against eviction by SCAs.
Facts: Pavement dwellers and slum residents were evicted by the Bombay Municipal Corporation to clear public spaces.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that the right to livelihood is part of the right to life (Article 21). Eviction without providing alternative accommodation is unconstitutional.
Significance: This case established that SCAs cannot evict slum dwellers arbitrarily and must ensure humane treatment and rehabilitation.
2. Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India (2000) 10 SCC 664
Issue: Procedural fairness and public participation in slum clearance and rehabilitation projects.
Facts: The Narmada Bachao Andolan challenged large-scale displacement due to development projects.
Judgment: The Court stressed the need for fair procedure, transparency, and public consultation before displacement and rehabilitation.
Significance: This case reinforced that SCAs and other authorities must follow procedural fairness and ensure meaningful participation of affected people.
3. People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982) 3 SCC 235
Issue: Right to housing and protection against forced eviction.
Facts: The case involved forced eviction of slum dwellers without due process.
Judgment: The Court held that administrative authorities, including SCAs, must respect constitutional rights and provide due process before eviction.
Significance: It reaffirmed the principle that eviction orders must not be arbitrary and must respect procedural fairness.
4. Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Gurnam Kaur (1989) 2 SCC 510
Issue: Doctrine of legitimate expectation in administrative decisions affecting slum dwellers.
Facts: Slum dwellers had been promised rehabilitation but were later evicted without rehabilitation.
Judgment: The Court held that the doctrine of legitimate expectation protects the rights of affected persons, and authorities cannot go back on their assurances without due cause.
Significance: This decision ensures that SCAs act fairly and honor commitments made to slum dwellers.
5. Shantistar Builders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame (1990) 1 SCC 520
Issue: Scope of judicial review over administrative actions by SCAs.
Facts: The case concerned administrative decisions related to land use and slum clearance.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that courts have the power to review administrative actions by SCAs for legality, reasonableness, and compliance with natural justice.
Significance: This case empowers courts to keep SCAs accountable and prevent misuse of administrative powers.
Summary
Slum Clearance Authorities function as administrative bodies under urban housing laws.
Their actions are governed by administrative law principles like legality, procedural fairness, and reasonableness.
The courts have protected the rights of slum dwellers by enforcing the right to livelihood and shelter and requiring SCAs to follow due process.
Case laws like Olga Tellis and Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Gurnam Kaur are landmark decisions safeguarding slum dwellers against arbitrary eviction.
Judicial review ensures SCAs act within the bounds of law and protect constitutional rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments