Re: SC fixes civic code: No slums, no littering

[amarprao@yahoo.com]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it, and propagate it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------

--- Nikhil Parekh <nikhil2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Please help make the Manifesto better, or accept it,
> and propagate it!
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> The supreme court has asked civic authorities in New
> Delhi to remove all the slums and stop their further
> growth in the city. The court has also asked the
> authorities to implement 10 directives aimed at
> better
> hygiene and environment. The authorities are
> supposed
> to file a complience report in eight weeks. The
> courts
> have also asked the authorities to impose a penalty
> of
> Rs 50 on persons found littering.

** Even Bangalore has such a rule that anyone found littering would need
to be fined. But put in simple terms it wont
work. Reasons are many as anyone may guess. <<Corruption in Police and
other civic authorities concerned>>


>
> " On the mushrooming growth of the slums, the court
> said `establishment or creating of slums... appears
> to
> be good business and is well organised... Large
> areas
> of public land, in this way, are usurped for private
> use free of cost. Its difficult to believe that this
> can happen in the Capital without passive or active
> connivance of the land owning agencies an/or the
> municipal authorities'. "
>
> " The judges noted that `the promise of free land,
> at
> the taxpayers' cost, in place of a jhuggi, is a
> proposal which attracts many land grabbers.

** Why must the Tax I pay go to provide something free for someone else.
I myself dont have a house of my own, and
from the tax I pay somebody gets a house for free. This is darn stupid.
Worst part is that the person who gets it free does
not even know its value.


> Rewarding
> an encroacher on public land with free alternate
> site
> is like giving a reward to a pickpocket'. "
>
> I think this is the right thing to do because a few
> years back the Maharashtra government provided one
> bedroom appartments to people living in the slums in
> Bombay. The aim was to get rid of the slums. But the
> people who were supposed to live in the appartments
> sold them off or rented them to others to make money
> and they went back to living in the slums.
>
** If Maharastra govt has done something like that, then thats very
stupid of them. A man never realizes the value of
something if he gets it for free without having to work hard for it. Any
fool would do what most of these poor people did.
It would have been sensible for the Maharastra govt to rent it out for
the people at a affordable rents(unlike atrocious
rents in Bombay).  In such a case they can never own it, but can stay in
such a place. Its not very difficult to put such a
practise in place. But for this u need nerve(which unfortunately our
govts lack due to their lust for power).


> More about the Supreme Court judgement can be found
> at:
>
> SC fixes civic code: No slums, no littering
> http://www.timesofindia.com/180200/18home2.htm
>



--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the National Debate on System Reform.       debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------