Gujarat
,
Ahmedabad
,
Ahmedabad
Published :
Jun 2018
|
Updated :
Slum Dwellers in Gujarat Displaced by Sabarmati Riverfront Await Rehabilitation
Reported by
Aditi Patil
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
10500
People affected
2006
Year started
30
Land area affected
Households affected
10500
People Affected
2006
Year started
30
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Urban Development (Other than Smart Cities)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Ended
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Urban Development (Other than Smart Cities)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Ended
1
Summary

The Sabarmati River Front Development project was envisaged in 1997 when the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) established a special purpose vehicle, the Sabarmati River Front Development Corporation Limited (SRFDCL), to develop the city's riverfront. Its 1998 proposal not only sought to ambitiously redevelop the riverfront but also brought the relocation and rehabilitation of the riverfront urban poor within the scope of the project. It recommended that six affected slum families be resettled on the riverfront itself, stating that displacing them more than 23 kilometres from their present site would affect their livelihoods negatively. A public interest litigation (PIL) was filed in the Gujarat high court in April 2005, articulating the rights of the slum dwellers. The court ruling gave a stay order, asking the government authorities to spell out their plans for resettlement and rehabilitation (R&R) and to not evict any family until further orders by the court. However, the rights articulated in the PIL were entirely absent in the rulings. For the next three years, the AMC continued with the construction of the riverfront project without finalising the R&R plan. Despite the stay order, the AMC tried to evict some families from different riverfront slums. The corporation finally submitted its R&R policy to the high court in mid2008. After three phases of resettlement in 200910, the AMC carried out demolitions in the riverfront slums in May 2011. On not having any housing facility or an alternative interim rehabilitation, over 1,000 families, including children and elderly people, were forced to live under the sweltering sun next to their demolished houses. Currently, the displaced people are facing increased unemployment and poverty. The resettlement had profound impact on their livelihood due to the distance. The average distance of the resettlement site from the central city area is seven kilometres. By 2017, at least 25 persons had committed suicide driven by depression because of loss of livelihood. Moreover, slum dwellers who were promised rehabilitation in new flats but were not given any were asked to reside on the grounds of Ganesh Nagar. They were given temporary plots to build a wooden shack with tarp but promised that new homes would be built. There has been no proper census of the hutments in the area and the plan grossly understates the number of affected people at least by 10,000 units, according to Deepak Babaria from Ahmedabad, who has worked closely with the riverfront dwellers' association for rehabilitation. In March 2021, tenders for an extension of the riverfront were floated. The new stretch is set to include an international park, a ferry service and a water taxi, among others. With all the slum hutments already cleared out from the area, the project will not involve rehabilitation and relocation at all and stands to proceed without any roadblocks, despite numerous slum dwellers still waiting to be rehabilitated.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Demand for rehabilitation

Complaint against procedural violations

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Non-Forest (Grazing Land), Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

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

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

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

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?

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

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

1796.3

Type of investment:

Cost of Project

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Sabarmati River Front Development Corporation Limited

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

No

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

HCP Design, Planning and Management Private Limited, Jhaveri Associates, Advance Engineering Consultants

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Sabarmati Nagrik Adhikar Manch, Rahethan Adhikar Manch, St. Xavier's Social Service Society

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

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

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

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

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?

Legal Supporting Documents

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
Author
Reported by
Aditi Patil

Aditi is a freelance development researcher. She has a Master’s in Development Studies from the Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India. She has previously worked with WWF India on forest-based livelihoods and international wildlife trade. She has also worked on the Forest Rights Act in Dangs district in Gujarat. Her paper, “Forest-based livelihoods, Malki practice and Forest Rights Act in Gujarat: The case of Adivasis in the Dangs,” has been published in the book, Adivasis in India: Livelihoods, Resources and Institutions, by Bloomsbury India.

Show more work
Latest updates
Nagaon
Assam

Farmers in Assam resist land acquisition for solar plant, beaten by police

Surat
Gujarat

Surat farmers claim fertile land re-included in Gujarat's development plan without consent

Gadchiroli
Maharashtra

Villagers in Gadchiroli campaign to shut down Surjagarh iron ore mine

Biswanath
Assam

Encroachment, land dispute pose threat to newly designated Behali Wildlife Sanctuary in Assam

Krishnagiri
Tamil Nadu

Residents in Krishnagiri protest against takeover of land by SIPCOT

Lower Siang
Arunachal Pradesh

Tension in Arunachal's Lower Siang over Likabali-Durpai road project amid boundary disputes

Kanyakumari
Tamil Nadu

Tamil Nadu revives plan to construct Kanyakumari Port despite protests by fisherfolk

Koraput
Odisha

Bauxite mining at Mali Parbat in Koraput seeks to displace and disrupt local livelihoods

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Demand for rehabilitation

Complaint against procedural violations

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

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?

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

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
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us