Mushrooming of Unauthorised Colonies in Delhi : A Case Study of Sangam Vihar

Abstract

For decades, about one-third of Delhi’s population has lived in unauthorised colonies, lacking basic services, social infrastructure, and even recognition in the city’s master plans. These colonies are not a feasible option for the city’s long-term growth as they are disaster-prone due to a lack of varied municipal facilities and structural faults. The Supreme Court of India has also stated that the proliferation of unlawful colonies across the country is a threat to urban development. Hence, it is critical to thoroughly research these formal but legal, unplanned yet well-developed settlements since they are a solid reality today that cannot be wished away. The objective of the present research paper is to understand the causes, consequences, and extent of the proliferation of unauthorised colonies (UACs) in Sangam Vihar and to understand the efforts made in terms of regularising the UACs by present and previous government and regulatory bodies. The research is exploratory in nature and uses three separate data gathering techniques: document analysis, thematic narrative analysis, and a survey. This study primarily focuses on interviewing, documenting, and analysing the responses of inhabitants of Sangam Vihar, which is one of the largest unauthorised colony of Asia as a whole.

Keywords

Urban Housing, Unauthorised Colonies, Living Conditions, Sangam Vihar, Regulatory bodies.

Introduction

For decades, about thirty per cent of Delhi’s population has been living in unauthorised colonies, lacking basic utilities, social infrastructure, and even recognition in the city’s master plans. With India’s partition in 1947, a large number of migrants had to be accommodated in the national capital in a short period of time. These were mostly accommodated in the form of unplanned settlements (colonies) in Delhi, as well as villages on the outskirts of the city. In those early years, the good availability of services, expanding markets, and growing demand for labour attracted many individuals to Delhi in search of work.” However, the persistent shortage of affordable housing in Indian cities like Delhi and Mumbai has driven low-income groups towards such informal settlements, as economic barriers limit access to formal housing options (Gandhi, 2012). The Delhi Development Authority, DDA, was tasked with planning the development of Delhi, one of the key components of which was to provide planned homes to Delhi residents. However, the gap between planned development and people’ demands became obvious over time, as planned development could not keep up with Delhi’s growing population. In total disdain for the existing rules and norms, a number of informal settlements sprang up around Delhi. These “spontaneous communities” could no longer be ignored as the large number of people living in them began to express themselves and became recognised as a substantial political constituency. Similar trends had been observed in metropolitan fringes like Seoul, where informal settlements emerged in response to rapid urbanisation and inadequate housing supply over decades (Han et al., 2017). These communities have been undergoing developed throughout these years and have metamorphosed into what we today know as ‘Unauthorised Colonies”(UACs). According to Shahana Sheikh’s (2014) analysis, these colonies fall under the category of “unplanned settlement types designated by the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD),” and they have grown either on non-agricultural land that has not yet been designated as residential or on agricultural land that has been illegally divided, completely disregarding the guidelines of the Delhi Master Plans. M.N Ganju (2012) stated that these colonies don’t have a single definition. Instead, the absence of even the most basic municipal facilities in such colonies makes them distinctive. Additionally, these communities have grown entirely through the efforts of average citizens, with no assistance from the government.

The Urban Development Department’s Annual Plan 2014–2015 (Volume II) lists the various habitats and colonies found in the National Capital Territory of Delhi:

1. J.J. Clusters

2. J.J Resettlement Colonies

3. Slums Rehabilitation Colonies

4. Regularized-Unauthorized Colonies

5. Approved/ Planned Colonies

6. Unauthorised Colonies (UACs)

7. Walled city/ Notified Slum Areas

Unauthorised colonies are one of the seven categories of “unplanned developments” listed on the website of the Delhi Urban Development Department. Shahana Sheikh and Subhadra Banda, (2014) stated that more than 30 per cent of Delhi’s population resides in what the government has categorised as unauthorised colonies. As per Artika Shukla (2016) analysis, these settlements give off an overall sense of poverty and unhealthy living conditions. As inexpensive, authorised housing in Delhi has become a dream, more individuals are gradually investing in real estate in these locations. These colonies are home to more than 35 lakh people. An additional 30 lakh individuals are thought to reside in Delhi’s six lakh Jhuggis, which are dispersed among 1200 JJ Clusters. This basically equates to more than 55 per cent of Delhi inhabitants living in residences other than what are referred to as “regularised colonies.”

Need for the Study

The estimates place the ‘unauthorised’ populace of Delhi at around 60 per cent. Unauthorised constructions abound in several sections of South Delhi, including Lajpat Nagar, Sangam Vihar and Sainik Farms. The vast majority of Delhi’s approximately three million private automobiles are parked on public property at night. It is considered that the majority of public buildings beyond the Lutyen’s zone are in violation of construction codes and regulations. The bulk of commercial structures are also in violation of standard governing open spaces and parking. Keeping all of this in mind, it is critical to research these formal but legal, unplanned yet well-developed settlements thoroughly since they are a solid reality today that cannot be wished away. The inhabitants of these colonies are in the millions, and it is now the state’s responsibility to assess their needs and arrange for a realistic solution. Sangam Vihar is one of Asia’s largest unauthorised colonies. This study is primarily focused on interviewing, documenting, and analysing the responses of inhabitants of Sangam Vihar.

Objectives of the Study

1. To understand causes, extent of the proliferation of unauthorised colonies in Sangam Vihar and potential municipal deprivations faced by the residents of these colonies.

2. To understand the efforts made in terms of regularising the UACs by present and previous government and regulatory bodies.

Research Method

The exploratory nature of the study uses three separate data gathering techniques: document analysis, thematic narrative analysis, and survey.

Survey

For the purpose of the survey, a total of 80 people were surveyed. A semi-structured interview with open-ended questions was conducted. The questionnaire was written in Hindi since the majority of the residents were more comfortable answering questions in Hindi. The door-to-door survey took 30 days to complete. The survey included questions about the respondents’ demographic details such as area density, male female ratio, educational level, income status, and source of livelihood.

Document Analysis

The documents have been analysed from the following sources such as

A. Public documents (newspaper)

B. Research articles from journals

C. Reports from policy think tanks

Thematic Narrative Analysis: The Thematic Narrative Analysis (TNA) has been used to summarise the results of the causes of the proliferation of UACs, and the municipal deprivations experienced by the residents of these UACs. Thematic narrative analysis draws upon qualitative traditions that value participants’ lived experiences and interpretative depth (Eisner, 1991).

Research Site

Area details are given in the Table below:

Table 1: Research Site : Sangam Vihar

As shown in Table 1, the locality, Sangam Vihar falls in South Delhi district situated in NCT of Delhi state, with a population of 208471 people. The male and female populations are 112168 and 96303 respectively. The size of the area is about 8.46 square kilometres. The Sangan Vihar colony has been designated by Delhi’s National Capital Territory as an unauthorised colony. Construction workers, daily wage labourers, drivers, vegetable vendors, and manufacturing employees make up the majority of the population in these colonies. The majority of the locals are employed as temporary, contractual workers by labour contractors in the Okhla industrial area. The majority of the residential requirements of the lower and middle classes are met by these colonies. In Sangam Vihar colony, there are approximately 189041 households. The colony came up on the agricultural land during 1970’s & 80’s. Communities from East of Kailash, Nehru Place, Govindpuri, Kailash Colony, Raj Nagar, and Alaknanda have been resettled here over the past several years. The colony is located near the Delhi-Haryana border.

Figure 1: A political map of Delhi and location of research site

As shown in Figure 1, Sangam Vihar is located in South Delhi, an area that has seen rapid and unplanned urbanisation. Many of the residents of these colonies lost their employment as a result of being displaced, thus,finding other means of support became extremely difficult. Even many years later today, the neighbourhood still has trouble getting access to basic services like clean water, sanitation waste disposal, and adequate street lighting, etc.

Figure 2: Geographic Location of Sangam ViharSource: Google Maps

As shown in Figure 2, Sangam Vihar lies on the southern edge of Delhi, near the Delhi-Haryana border, positioning it as a liminal zone between urban and peri-urban dynamics. It highlights its proximity to important landmarks like Tughlaqabad Fort and the Delhi-Haryana border, helping to understand how the settlement fits into the city’s larger structure. These references provide a clear picture of its placement in relation to major roads, transport routes, and surrounding areas.

Sangam Vihar is one of the largest unauthorised colonies in Asia and has grown rapidly over the years. Its expansion has been shaped by migration patterns, mainly involving people who moved here after being displaced from other parts of Delhi due to redevelopment projects. Many of these residents work as construction workers, daily wage labourers, small business owners, and street vendors. With limited planning and government support, the colony developed in an unregulated manner, leading to high population density and severe infrastructure challenges.

Since Sangam Vihar is located near the Delhi-Haryana border, it acts as a transition zone between urban and semi-urban areas. Many residents commute to nearby industrial and commercial hubs such as Okhla and Nehru Place for work. Despite being in Delhi’s National Capital Territory (NCT), the colony lacks many basic amenities, such as proper water supply, sanitation, and public transport.

Figure 3: Administrative Boundaries and Blocks of Sangam Vihar

The data were collected from six major blocks in Sangam Vihar C, D, E, G, H, and K based on criteria such as population density, infrastructure, and occupational diversity, as depicted in Figure 3. These blocks were selected based on their population density, occupational patterns, infrastructure conditions, and access to public services.

Blocks C, D, and E have higher population density and house a diverse range of occupations, including labourers, small business owners, and street vendors. Given their central location, these blocks provide insight into the economic vibrancy and daily challenges of densely populated sections.

Block G and H – Characterised by severe infrastructure deficits, these blocks face acute shortages of clean water supply and inadequate sanitation. They depict the typical challenges of unauthorised colonies, where residents struggle with access to essential services.

Block K – This block is situated on the edge of Sangam Vihar, close to the Delhi-Haryana border. It represents the urban-rural transition and helps in understanding the challenges of newly developed sections of the colony in terms of accessibility, infrastructure, and socio-economic integration.

By focusing on these blocks, the study aims to capture variations in living conditions, employment patterns, and access to basic services within the settlement.

Sampling techniques

Data about Sangam Vihar’s residents was gathered using the incidental sampling approach.

Data Analysis and Results

Data analysis and results have been segregated into three categories:

1. In accordance with the research objectives, survey data has been analysed using the simple statistical techniques, such as percentages to understand the demographic details of the Sangam Vihar colony. 2. The objective of the research is to examine the efforts made to regularise the colony by the government and regulatory bodies. For the same, a detailed document analysis has been done making use of various reports, research articles, and news articles available till date. 3. Narrative analysis has been utilised to present the various themes related to the causes for proliferation and municipal deprivation faced by residents of Sangam Vihar.

Survey Findings

Table 2: Demographic Survey of Sangam Vihar

As shown in Table 2, 60 per cent of respondents were males and 40 per cent were females. Among the female group of participants, 18 of the 32 respondents held a degree equivalent to class X, 9 held a degree equivalent to class XII, and just two held a degree equivalent to graduation. Out of 48 male respondents, 13 held a degree equivalent to class X, 13 held a degree corresponding to class XII, and five held a degree equivalent to graduation.

There were numerous instances of dropouts among both male and female respondents. Women often left education to focus on household responsibilities, while men dropped out to support their families financially. Despite their lack of formal education, both male and female individuals had acquired the specific skills required for their respective jobs.

In terms of income, 60 per cent of the population falls into the medium income band, with yearly earnings ranging from Rs. 5 lakhs to 30 lakhs. Both men and women, were salaried employees of the private sector. 33 per cent of the population was classified as below poverty line, with an annual income ranging from Rs. 1.20 to 1.80 lakhs. The vast majority of men employed in the unorganised sector, worked as shopkeepers, auto mechanics, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, daily wage labourers, fruit and vegetable sellers, construction workers, cleaners, and so on. Females from this strata were either housewives, or worked as factory workers, househelps and as cooks, etc. This income strata highlighted a distinct skill set which could not be acquired at a school, college, or training institute, but from experience and personal work with trained and skilled individuals. The remaining seven per cent of the population belonged to the higher income category, with an annual income of more than 30,000 lakhs. These people owned the land and received monthly or annual rent payments from tenants.

36.25 per cent of the people in these colonies were self-employed, with the majority working as shop owners, plumbers, carpenters, cooks, cleaners, florists, and so on, while 28.75 per cent worked as service professionals like clerks, office assistants, school teachers, mechanics, hair stylists, nurses, bankers, and so on. It was startling to learn that almost 25 per cent of the whole sample was unemployed, while 10 per cent were students.

Document Analysis

The documents have been analysed from the following sources such as

D. Public documents (newspaper)

E. Research articles from journals 

F. Reports from policy think tanks

1. Major regularisation waves in history of Delhi: In Delhi’s history, three main waves of “regularisation” have occurred. As part of the initial Master Plan, 102 colonies were regularised in the first wave in 1962. The second wave occurred in 1975, when 567 unauthorised colonies were regularised. In 2009, about a decade and a half after applying for regularisation, 733 of these colonies were regularised as part of the third major wave of regularisation . The Government of Delhi invited applications from RWAs of UACs in 2004 to submit the layout of the colonies and sought for regularisation. Following that, in 2008, before the assembly elections, 1,218 UACs were awarded ‘Provisional Regularisation Certificates (PRC),’ and 895 were regularised. It was later assumed that this was done for political purposes. PRCs appear to have had little or no impact on full regularisation or service supply (Bhan, 2013). 

2. PM-UDAY and regularisation of UACs in Delhi : The political parties in Delhi have made the regularisation of UACs an electoral issue every time. The Union government announced the PM-UDAY (Prime Minister - Unauthorized Colonies in Delhi Awas Adhikar Yojana) initiative, which would grant property ownership or transfer/mortgage rights to inhabitants of illegal colonies in Delhi through the Delhi Development Authority (DDA). The scheme’s debut and implementation coincided with the run-up to the 2020 Delhi state elections. Around 4,37,255 PM-UDAY registrations were made on the platform till October 2021, with 87,275 applications submitted. Thirty applications were disposed of out of 717. However, there is no information as to what happened to the rest of the registrations. The residents of UACs were cajoled with the prospect of regularisation, which coincided with elections almost every time. The regularisation programme PM-UDAY initiative took centre stage in the run-up to the Delhi state elections in February 2020. Despite the desirable option to secure full ownership rights, evidence shows a lacklustre reaction. Notwithstanding its good intentions, the PM-UDAY initiative has fallen short of combining strategies and directives for basic infrastructure services. These needs were non-negotiable, particularly in the event of a global health pandemic. To ensure the efficient absorption of UACs into urban development mainstreaming, the PM-UDAY must be coordinated with the impending Delhi Master Plan 2041 (Nagpal, Singh and Sharma, 2021). 

3. Extent of proliferation in Sangam Vihar : To get a sense of the complexity of the task at hand, the authors have attempted to superimpose the image of Lodhi Garden, a 90-acre posh urban park in Delhi, over satellite imagery of Sangam Vihar, one of India’s largest unauthorised colonies. Sangam Vihar can hold a total of 12 Lodhi Gardens, demonstrating the immense scale of the unauthorised community. The image effectively captures the spatial inequities faced by residents of unauthorised colonies, residing in high-density urban clusters with inadequate urban infrastructure (Ajith & Kataria, 2022). The uncertainty around regularisation remains, despite delimitation in 2008 that defined the current constituency boundaries, as shown in Figure 4. The current boundaries of the Sangam Vihar constituency were established in 2008 as part of the execution of the recommendations of the Delimitation Commission of India, which was established in 2002. The residents are sceptical of the regularisation’s fate, and most fear that it will be a damp squib, like the provisional regularisation certificates provided to colonies prior to the 2008 assembly elections.

Figure 4: Extent of Proliferation in Sangam Vihar

4. Politicisation of regulation of UACs in Delhi elections: The sporadic nature of policy announcements and changes has been a special feature of the problem of UACs in Delhi, and this can be attributed to the political aspects of the matter as election dates approach, work in this context accelerates and then slows down due to multiple institutional constraints. As shown in Table 3, apart from the political impediments, another impediment in improving the conditions of UACs in Delhi, is the multiplicity of institutions involved in the regulation of these housing units such as Local body, GNCTD1, and DDA2 (Prabhakar, Agarwal, & Rangan 2019).

Table 3 : Political Angle of Policy Formulation for UACs

5. Actions by the GNCTD regarding regularisation of UACs: Table 3 summarises the actions taken by the GNCTD regarding the regularisation of UACs. This was a sequence of processes that included revising the official land records and retracting the notification of purchase. No sincere regularisation drive has taken place since 1993 ( Banda, & Sheikh, 2014). 

The data presented in Table 4 outlines the major milestones in the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi’s (GNCTD) efforts to regularise unauthorised colonies. These efforts span from the early waves of regularisation in 1962 and 1975 to more structured processes in 2007, 2008–09, and 2012.

Table 4: Actions by the GNCTD regarding regularisation of UACs

Narrative Analysis

A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding ensured both grounded theory emergence and thematic validation (Fereday & Muir-Cochrane, 2006). The analysis produced the following themes on causes for living in UACs

(i) Migration for livelihood : According to the majority of the responses, the primary reason for persons living in UACs to migrate to Delhi and purchase a plot in an unauthorised colony was to earn a livelihood. “I moved from Uttar Pradesh in 1996 to earn my living because I didn’t have any source of income in my own state,” said one of the residents during an informal discussion.

 (ii) Affordability: All of the participants agreed that they acquired plots in UACs because these were affordable and they got value for money based on their income. “I acquired this land in 2008 using a Power of Attorney from a property agent that did not contain a full registration, and this is why our colonies were deprived of basic municipal services. I chose this plot since it was easily accessible, affordable, and the process for obtaining these plots was simple.”, said another resident.

(iii) Better educational facilities: A vast majority of the respondents stated that social constraints, and poor educational and career possibilities were also major drivers of migration to and settlement in UACs;.

(iv) Property owner, politicians and bureaucracy nexus: The involvement and vested interests of property owners/brokers, politicians, and bureaucrats were mentioned as the most common reasons why residents of Sangam Vihar did not choose DDA flats. A corrupt system also marred the process of obtaining a DDA flat.

“The broker would seek the same amount to book a DDA unit as I paid to buy a house in the colony. After the broker’s booking, the purchase price was to be paid to the owner separately. I paid 10,000 rupees per square yard for the flat that I acquired in the colony. I am satisfied with the price because it was reasonable for the time when I acquired the land in the year 2000,’ said a buyer.

The analysis produced the following themes on deprivations faced by residents

(i) Physical and Social infrastructure: Some of the respondents expressed that there were plots with no setbacks, plots that touched the walls on three sides of different plots, no provision for ventilation or fresh air, different typologies coexisting, room sizes that were extremely small, and basements that were sometimes used for industrial activities. 

“The establishment of unauthorised colonies is completely flawed. Electricity is putting a significant pressure on the physical infrastructure, with an increase in electric meter connections leading to an increase in transformer demand. Because there are no building height constraints, builders have built towers up to G+4 storeys without getting permission or following any structure-related regulations. 

There were only a few government primary and secondary schools. A few government-run dispensaries in addition to private clinics were operational.

(ii) Water Supply & Electricity: Lack of Delhi Jal Board water supply was another challenge that these residents had to deal with. Most of these residents purchase water from tankers or rely on their own personal water pumps. Almost 45per cent of the houses surveyed claimed to have their own privately installed pumps, although more than 55 per cent acknowledged at least occasionally purchasing water from tankers at higher prices. Residents were reliant on BSES/DESU for electricity. Electricity was often carried via dangerously exposed, barbed wires, which made these colonies even more vulnerable to mishappenings.

(iii) Drainage and Public utility: The respondents stated that while municipal water services and public borewells were available, drainage facilities were limited. There were sewage lines that were not closed. The blockage of rain water throughout the wet season exacerbated the problem. The majority of the respondents who were interviewed for the study were living in very difficult circumstances in their leased homes. The rooms in their accommodations were very small, and the majority of them lacked a kitchen and bathroom. Since there were no municipally anchored sewage lines, the sanitation conditions were pitiful in these colonies. People were using the open fields as toilets because most of the dwellings lacked toilet facilities. The administration did not provide a facility to clean up or collect trash from the neighbourhoods. Due to the absence of facilities, these areas became a landfill.

(iv) Property Ownership rights: Another issue that bothered the residents of the colonies was the question of property ownership. Residents were unable to borrow against their property. 

(v) Increased crime and conflicts: The regular conflicts and crime rates in the colonies, as well as the use of abusive language, had made life more difficult for families and children. Due to increased unemployment, people continued to roam indiscriminately in the colonies, causing havoc. These colonies struggle to survive as a result of their primary concern for the protection of women and children from local goons. “After sunset, it becomes really difficult to go with children and families because there are numerous groups that just start a fight without any reason and will use offensive language,” residents were quoted as saying.

(vi) Maladministration: Residents cited further issues against the administration, claiming that the administration would unduly seize the roadways. Because the roads were already quite narrow and traffic congestion was regular, the unnecessary seizure of roads by the police administration had worsened the problem.

Summary of Findings

a. Demographics

The majority of the female respondents had a degree equivalent to class X, and among males, few held a degree equivalent to class X, and a few others held a degree corresponding to class XII. Only a very few people had passed out of class XII. Numerous incidences of dropouts were seen in both male and female groups of respondents, with later compelled to concentrate on household responsibilities and males to earn a living for the family. Despite their lack of formal education, both groups of males and females possessed the particular set of skills necessary for the jobs.

The majority of people in these colonies were self-employed, working as shop owners, plumbers, carpenters, cooks, cleaners, florists, and so on, while a few others worked as service professionals such as clerks, office assistants, school teachers, mechanics, hair stylists, nurses, bankers, and so on.

Almost over 20 per cent of the population was jobless, whereas 10 per cent were students.

b. Deprivation faced

The residents of Sangam Vihar UAC experienced the following municipal deficiencies:

(i) The absence of social infrastructure including public parks, community centres, schools, and clinics;.

(ii) There were no standards for how many floors a structure should have or how to construct it so that it is disaster-ready or meets the building standards;

(iii) The government did provide electricity across the entire settlement, but it did not conforming to standards. The bulk of these people rely on their own personal water pumps or tanker deliveries of water; and

(iv) The safety of women and children from local goons was a major concern of these communities.

c. Efforts made by the regulatory bodies

In response to the increasing number of unauthorised colony structures, the government has consistently implemented laws to regularise them and provide basic amenities to colony inhabitants. From 1977 through 1993, the government was periodically involved in the process of regularising these colonies. In 2008, shortly before the elections, a list of 1218 colonies were awarded “Provisional Regularisation Certificates”. It was later stated in 2012 that 895 of the aforementioned colonies were determined to be “suitable for regularisation” but not actually regularised. Furthermore, this was a sequence of processes that included revising the official land records and retracting the notification of purchase. Even now, this process is not complete. Recent news reports indicate partial progress with over 10,000 ownership rights granted under PM-UDAY in 2021 (Hindustan Times, 2021). The process of regularising colonies like Sangam Vihar has often been stalled, and final approvals from central authorities are still awaited. (Ghosh, 2021). As a result, no sincere regularisation drive has taken place since 2008.

Moreover, there appears to be a lack of understanding, capacity, and desire in dealing with stakeholders. Despite their best intentions, policymakers appear to have forgotten about the bulk of UACs, which are frequently low-income settlements populated by individuals with poor education and technological skills. Apart from the application price, the fact that applications may only be made online on an English-only portal, rather than a bilingual form, effectively eliminates many locals from participating. Furthermore, while the majority of inhabitants have mobile phones, mandatory procedures such as creating or providing an email account complicate matters. Typical issues include insufficient and defective property documents, as well as many claims for the same property. Acknowledging the heterogeneity of UACs necessitates engagement with various stakeholders who play active roles in this settlement. Categorisation of settlements remains a fundamental step in designing targeted policy responses (Mukhopadhyay et al., 2015). The Delhi Master Plan 2041 offers a partial solution for UACs but lacks actionable frameworks for immediate relief (Matam, 2021).

d. Causes for residing in UACs

Followng were the main grounds given by the inhabitants for residing in these colonies:

1. Affordability and availability of cheap housing was the major reason for people to buy or rent homes in UACs

2. The tedious process of acquiring DDA flats, coupled with corruption in DDA flat delivery was another reason pushing people to buy homes in UACs. 

3. As most of the people living in UACs were working as factory workers hence they had a locational advantage. 

4. Civic amenities were also scarce in authorised plots and they cost more than the plots in UACs with almost the same civic amenities.

Discussion

One key factor for the proliferation of unplanned settlements in Delhi was the city’s exponential population growth since Independence. People continued to move to Delhi since the city served as a hub for all economic, educational, and job possibilities for individuals from all across the country. This puts further strain on an already limited resource: land, which was later fragmented and improperly subdivided further down the line. Nevertheless, most people in Delhi chose to settle and add to the city’s population.

The study’s findings were consistent with Dupont’s assertion that since Delhi’s urban density increased from 7,225 pp km in 1961 to 14,667 pp km in 2011 owing to new migrants, the city’s planned growth has fallen well short of its objectives. Dupont, V. (2008) This produced a massive unmet need for housing, which these colonies addressed as a low-cost choice. The same was echoed in the survey responses, when respondents cited affordability and quick availability as reasons for choosing UACs. According to Bakan and Linden, the establishment of unauthorised colonies in a city was a response to the lack of affordable formal housing. (Bankan & Linden, 1992-97).

The study’s findings were consistent with Shahana Sheikh’s contention that the inability of the government to provide appropriate, affordable housing to the residents of Delhi on time was the single most critical factor for the emergence of unauthorised colonies. The single developer of affordable public housing in Delhi, the Delhi Development Authority, has continuously fallen short of the ever-increasing demand, driving the working class to seek alternatives unlawfully. Furthermore, as highlighted by Kritika Narula in her working paper has opined that the plot sizes and quality of services offered in DDA-developed apartments in Delhi have fallen well short of people’s expectations coupled with political patronage which has further worsened the problem (Narula, 2009). This was one of the primary reasons why medium and lower income people have decided to invest in structurally solid and liveable houses in unauthorised colonies at the same prices.

The most common motivations for migrating were for better educational possibilities, career prospects, marriage, and new markets (Ganju, 2012). This combined with the city’s rising urbanisation and massive expenditures in infrastructure and ongoing works, attracted a large number of employees to Delhi. The same arguments were represented in the study, when respondents stated numerous reasons for their migration, such as earning a living, discrimination based on caste, better education, and expanding markets, among others.

Undoubtedly these housing structures provide inexpensive accommodation to the migrant population of Delhi NCR, but we must also remember that these housing structures are not a feasible option for the city’s long-term growth. These colonies are disaster-prone due to a lack of different municipal facilities and structural faults. The Supreme Court of India has also stated that the proliferation of unlawful colonies across the country is a threat to urban development.

Another concern is the scarcity of job prospects in both rural, and semi-urban areas. The more we can expand industry in these areas, the less people will go to cities. Until the courts decide to investigate these two concerns, we may continue to compile a list of illegal colonies, accuse the mafia, politicians, and everyone else under the sun, and the situation will worsen.

Politicians and the land mafia have long fostered illegal settlements, resulting in Delhi becoming a city of slums, illegal colonies, and ghettos. In order to secure their support, the Delhi administration has formally regularised several ‘illegal’ colonies in various sections of the city. These challenges in Delhi reflect a broader tension between urban informality and formal planning. The persistence of unauthorised colonies like Sangam Vihar highlights the failure of urban governance to provide affordable housing and basic infrastructure (Ahluwalia et al., 2014; Bardhan, 2009). Despite initiatives like PM-UDAY, political expediency often overrides sustainable planning (Nagpal, 2021; Matam, 2021). These settlements remain excluded from Smart City benefits and SDG 11 targets, deepening inequality (Abdel-Razek, 2021; Doyle & Stiglitz, 2014; Manoj Kumar et al., 2018). Addressing this requires integrated governance and participatory urban redevelopment (Meuleman, 2021; Jain & Rohracher, 2022).As Giuliodori et al. (2023) argue, achieving sustainable and inclusive development requires harmonising smart governance and long-term policy planning, in line with SDG 11. Smart governance is essential to aligning unauthorised colonies with sustainable urban frameworks, especially under the context of SDG 11, which calls for inclusive and safe cities (Abdel-Razek, 2021).

Suggestions

(i) The function of the DDA as the exclusive authority for land planning and development in Delhi has to be discussed and explored in order to build a new institutional structure, since the DDA has failed miserably in meeting the demands of the city’s growing population. Jain and Rohracher (2022) emphasise that true infrastructure transformation depends on assessing local governance capacity and inclusive redevelopment planning. As a result, the supply side of the land equation must be enhanced by enabling private developers to engage in the land market, which had hitherto been solely DDA’s domain. As a result, the DDA’s function should eventually be reduced to planning and monitoring, and it should serve as a facilitator rather than being the only executor of land development. While Babić

et al., (2022) argue that smaller cities face compounded governance challenges due to scale, the case of Delhi demonstrates that even large metropolises struggle to coordinate among multiple planning bodies, highlighting the universal difficulty of effective urban governance. 

(ii) There is a need for a framework under which civic amenities and basic municipal services could be provided to these colonies in order to ensure the required standards of sanitation, public health, and safety in these areas, as there are more than 1208471 people residing in Sangam Vihar UAC and many others in various other UACs in Delhi.

(iii) As it has been plainly evident that the current regulations have been excessively lax in this regard, it is proposed that the existing political patronage and nexus of politicians and builders be dismantled to make the DDA plots allocation less cumbersome and more prompt. Any laxity or corruption by law enforcement authorities should be investigated thoroughly. Moreover, cases involving illicit property transactions, other land-related conflicts, should be resolved rapidly by creating Fast Track courts for land matters. This will also aid in the establishment of a rule-of-law ethos in Delhi. As urban spaces continue to expand, ensuring sustainable governance is critical, a challenge also identified by Bibri (2021) in the context of managing urban growth within the Sustainable Development Goals framework

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study offers a nuanced examination of the causes and challenges faced by people residing in unauthorised colonies in Delhi. The narrative analysis has unveiled a multifaceted picture, emphasising migration for livelihood, affordability, and the intricate nexus involving property owners, politicians, and bureaucracy as primary reasons for choosing these settlements. The deprivations faced by residents, ranging from inadequate physical and social infrastructure to issues with water supply, electricity, and property ownership rights, underscore the urgent need for comprehensive interventions. While regulatory efforts have been made, the study reveals persistent challenges and a digital divide in the regularisation process. The broader context of Delhi’s urban development crisis, characterised by exponential population growth and inadequate planned growth, reinforces the urgency of re-evaluating existing policies and engaging with the root causes of illegal settlements. The suggestions outlined, including a redefined role for the Delhi Development Authority, private sector involvement, and the establishment of a framework for civic amenities, aim to guide policymakers in formulating effective strategies to address the complex issues associated with unauthorised colonies, promoting sustainable and inclusive urban development in the national capital. India’s urban revolution under SDG 11 calls for the urgent inclusion of informal colonies into mainstream planning frameworks (Muttana & Singam, 2023). As Mallick et al., (2023) recommend, urban resilience frameworks like the Pressure and Release (PAR) approach should be adapted to Indian cities to anticipate and address future infrastructural vulnerabilities. Integrating governance into SDG strategies must be a priority for urban areas to promote sustainable and equitable development (Biermann et al., 2014).

References

Abdel-Razek, S. A. (2021). Governance and SDGs in smart cities context. In Smart Cities and the UN SDGs (pp. 61-70). Elsevier.

Ahluwalia, I. J., Kanbur, R., & Mohanty, P. K. (Eds.). (2014). Urbanisation in India: Challenges, opportunities and the way forward.

Ajith, A., & Kataria, R. (2022). Delhi’s Unauthorised Colonies: An Issue Only for the Election Season? The Quint. https://www.thequint.com/author/1640884/aditya-ajith-and-ritu-kataria

Babić, A., Sokolić, D., & Antonić, J. J. (2022). Development of smart governance in Croatian cities - the size of a city as a determinant of smart governance. Ekonomski vjesnik/Econviews - Review of Contemporary Business, Entrepreneurship and Economic Issues.

Bakan, R.-J., & van der Linden, J. (1992). Land Delivery for Low Income Groups in Third World Cities. Aldershot: Avebury.

Banda, S., & Sheikh, S. (2014). Regularizing Unauthorized Colonies in Delhi: The Thin Line between Legitimate and Illegal.

Bardhan, P. (2009). India and China: Governance issues and development. The Journal of Asian Studies, 68(2), 347-357.

Bhan, G. (2013). Planned illegalities: housing and the ‘failure’ of planning in Delhi: 1947-2010. Economic and Political Weekly, 58–70.

Bibri, S. E. (2021). Data-driven smart sustainable cities of the future: an evidence synthesis approach to a comprehensive state-of-the-art literature review. Sustainable Futures. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2021.100047

Biermann, F., Stevens, C., Bernstein, S., Gupta, A., & Kabiri, N. (2014). Integrating governance into the sustainable development goals (No. 3). UNU-IAS.

Dupont, V. (2008). Slum Demolitions in Delhi since the 1990s: An Appraisal. Economic and Political Weekly, 43(49), 75-81. Retrieved from https://www.epw.in/journal/2008/49/special-articles/slum-demolitions-delhi-1990s-appraisal.html

Doyle, M., & Stiglitz, J. (2014). Eliminating Extreme Inequality: A Sustainable Development Goal, 2015–2030. Ethics & International Affairs, 28, 5-13. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679414000021

Eisner, E. W. (1991). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Toronto: Collier Macmillan Canada.

Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1).

Gandhi, S. (2012). Economics of affordable housing in Indian cities: The case of Mumbai. Environment and Urbanization Asia, 3(1), 221-235.

Ganju, M. A. (1998). Note on Village Planning and Architecture by MN Ashish Ganju. Available at: https://oa.mg/work/2883623740

Ghosh, S. (2021). Regularisation of illegal colonies awaits Centre’s nod. The Hindu. https://journal.ijramt.com/index.php/ijramt/article/view/2506

Giuliodori, A., Berrone, P., & Ricart, J. E. (2023). Where smart meets sustainability: the role of smart governance in achieving the sustainable development goals in cities. Brq Business Research Quarterly, 27–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/23409444221091281

Han, Y., Song, Y., Burnette, L., & Lammers, D. (2017). Spatiotemporal Analysis of the Formation of Informal Settlements in a Metropolitan Fringe: Seoul (1950–2015). Sustainability, 9, 1190. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9071190

Jain, M., & Rohracher, H. (2022). Assessing transformative change of infrastructures in urban area redevelopments. Cities. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103573

Kataria, A. A., & R. (2022). Delhi’s unauthorized colonies: An issue only for the election season? TheQuint.

Mallick, S. K., Das, P., Maity, B., Rudra, S., Pramanik, M., Pradhan, B., & Sahana, M. (2023). Understanding future urban growth, urban resilience, and sustainable development of small cities using the prediction-adaptation-resilience (PAR) approach. Sustainable Cities and Society. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103196

Matam, A. (2021). Delhi master plan 2041: A half-step forward for unauthorized colonies – but more is needed. Scroll.in.

Meuleman, L. (2021). Public Administration and Governance for the SDGs: Navigating between Change and Stability. Sustainability, 13, 5914. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115914

Mukhopadhyay, P., et al. (2015). Categorisation of settlement in Delhi, Centre for Policy Research. Available at: https://cprindia.org/people/subhadra-banda/

Muttana, R. R., & Singam, S. M. (2023). India in the Urban Revolution through the lens of sustainable development goal 11, International Journal of Recent Advances in Multidisciplinary Topics.

Nagpal, S. (2021). Regularising Unauthorised Colonies in Delhi: Well-Intended but Not Enough. India Housing Report. Available at: https://indiahousingreport.in/author/sukrit-nagpal/

Narula, K. (2009). Analysis of the Housing Delivery Mechanism & DDA’s Role in It. Centre for Civil Society. Retrieved from https://www.readkong.com/page/analysis-of-the-housing-delivery-mechanism-dda-s-role-in-6476389

Ownership rights for over 10,000 residents of unauthorized colonies in Delhi (2021). Hindustan Times.

Prabhakar, P., Agarwal, A., & Rangan, D. (2019). Urban policy failure in Delhi: A case of unauthorized colonies. Urban India, 39(2), 1–15.

Shukla, A. (2016). Unauthorised colonies in South Delhi: Causes, impact and way forward Dissertation, Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration (LBSNAA), Mussoorie.

Endnotes

1. The Government of Delhi, officially the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) is the governing body of the Union Territory of Delhi.

2. The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) was created in 1957 under the provisions of the Delhi Development Act “to promote and secure the development of Delhi”. The DDA is responsible for planning, development and construction of Housing Projects, Commercial Lands, Land Management, Land Disposal, Land Pooling, Land Costing etc.