Maharashtra
,
Govandi
,
Mumbai Suburban
Published :
Mar 2024
|
Updated :
Over 1,000 left homeless after BMC razes shanties in Govandi, residents say no notice served
Reported by
Shubham Kothari
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
200
Households affected
1000
People affected
2023
Year started
Land area affected
200
Households affected
1000
People Affected
2023
Year started
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

Over 1,000 people were rendered homeless after the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) demolished about 200 structures on 6 and 7 February, 2024, in Panchsheel Nagar slum in Govandi, in Mumbai suburb, without prior notice.

Residents along with activists of Jan Haqq Sangarsh Samiti resisted the demolitions, which were carried out in haste, barely allowing them to collect their documents and belongings.

Jan Haqq Sangarsh Samiti members alleged that the police lathicharged the residents trying to individually resist the eviction from their household. The police further detained seven activists of the collective. Those detained were released in the evening.

The MCGM had served an eviction and demolition notice to residents of Panchsheel Nagar on 17 October, 2023. However, the residents and a local organization noted that the notice did not have an official seal and signature. Also, it did not mention the CTS location of the area to be demolished. After this, the residents had submitted an application for rehabilitation and threatened to protest against the MCGM. The MCGM had then agreed to identify protected structures before any evictions were conducted.

On February 2, oral announcements were made by BMC officials about the impending demolition. However, on 6 February 2024, the MCGM came to the settlement without any prior notice and carried out the demolitions.

MCGM officials informed the residents that the evictions were conducted for construction of a girls hostel and a park as mentioned in the Development Plan. Residents, however, protested outside the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) office against procedural violation during the eviction drive.

The MCGM did not conduct a survey of all residents or create the Annexure of eligible and ineligible residents. As per the eligibility, the MCGM is bound to rehabilitate people prior to demolishing structures built before 01.01.2011. These complaints were not answered by the officials of MCGM and they continued demolishing houses on the second day as well.

On 8 February, 2024, the residents along with Jan Haqq Sangarsh Samiti, called for a protest march demanding an immediate halt on evictions and urged the MCGM to follow the due procedures of law. They also demanded restoration of water and electricity connections; making a list of eligible and ineligible slum dwellers based on documents submitted; holding hearings in case of objections; and correct the incorrect data based on which demolitions were done. After the protest, the MCGM halted the demolitions for seven days. However, fearing complete eviction from the land after the end of seven days, residents started a sit in protest at the site demanding MCGM to follow the procedures established to evict and rehabilitate slum dwellers.

A week later, the MCGM officials agreed to grant residents seven days' time to submit their documents, after which they said they will prepare the annexure, and then take action.

The Jan Haqq Sangarsh Samiti organisation has submitted documents of all residents as per the resettlement deadline of 2011. They also met the area MLA Nawab Malik who assured the rehabilitation of those eligible and confirmed the plan to construct a hostel for working women on the said plot.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for rehabilitation

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

What was the action taken by the police?

Detention

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

7

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

Released from detention

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)

LCW researcher spoke to people who got detained and those who were lathicharged during the demolition drive.

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Residential area

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

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:

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM)

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:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

5
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?

7

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

Released from detention

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
Shubham Kothari

Shubham is a housing rights activist based in Mumbai. He has a post graduate from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai in urban policy and governance.

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 rehabilitation

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

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

Residential area

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