Demolition derby

Given the mood in the Delhi assembly, and the law and order situation that is building up, no one should be surprised if the current court-ordered demolition drive in the capital comes to an end soon. Indeed, there are already reports that Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit will ask the courts, who have given the authorities four weeks to complete the demolition of 18,271 illegal structures, for some more time and try to have the capital's master plan modified to legalise the offending constructions. That politics should come down on the side of the wrongdoers suggests that those who have violated building laws are in the majority, or at least a significant minority""a telling comment in itself. The buildings under the spotlight are those that came up in the last four years; if you count from further back in time, the number is much larger. Although every buyer of a building that has gone beyond the sanctioned plan knew what he was doing, and therefore no tears need be shed for them even as they protest today, it is testing the limits for the municipal corporation to go about knocking down tens of thousands of houses and offices. Civic unrest will surely result.

The court is of course within its rights to say that the corporation must give effect to its own laws, and punish those who violate them""but it is worth bearing in mind that demolition operations have frequently been halted in the past by stay orders from the courts. The question today is whether financial penalties are a substitute for demolition. Where the over-building is marginally beyond the existing limits for compounding offences, or does not over-step the prescribed plinth, there could be a case of imposing stiff fines on those who wish to escape the demolition derby""and the fines should reflect current real estate prices so that they become a deterrent. But allowing more covered area will increase the density of neighbourhoods, and this solution therefore comes at a price.

No solution will survive the builder-official nexus if sack orders are not issued to all officials who failed to ensure that buildings got their certificates for electricity and water connection only when they complied with the sanctioned plans. In the New Delhi Municipal Committee area (in the privileged heart of the capital), this discipline has worked well and the builders have behaved themselves; it is in the corporation's much larger area that there has been lawlessness. The nexus is also evident in a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General on the number of demolition notices issued for illegal construction in the city. The CAG found that between 68 per cent and 93 per cent of unauthorised constructions that were ordered to be demolished during 1995-2000 were never touched by the bulldozer! Half of those which had to be sealed, needless to say, were not sealed. That crores of rupees would have changed hands for such miraculous lack of follow-up action, is a given.

Under the circumstances, it would be a good idea for the court to appoint an amicus curae to keep tabs on the investigations that will now be started, lest the whole thing get forgotten as soon as the dust has settled. This supervision should ideally be an executive function, but since the executive cannot be trusted, judicial oversight is not a bad idea. As in all such cases, the operating principle has to be the same""follow the money.