Sauvik Chakraverti The Times of India Wednesday, March 15, 2006
While considering the merits of the judicial order to demolish over 18,000 private buildings in Delhi, a few plain truths must be borne in mind. First and foremost is the fact that overbuilding and overcrowding are not caused by private greed. Rather, they are a result of poor transportation. There is surely enough land in the National Capital Region for every citizen to own a Lutyens-type bungalow, but this land cannot be brought into service because of poor connectivity. This is a state failure, because of which builders have the perverse incentive to ignore building bye-laws and overbuild. If there were expressways to each of the 400 towns in the NCR, property prices in Delhi would crash, overcrowding would end, and overbuilding would be unprofitable.
Under 'natural law' every landowner is free to build what he likes on his own property. If we sacrifice some of this freedom for collective gain, then that collective gain must materialise. Here, we are forced to conclude that our town planners have actually contrived to destroy our habitat. Delhi is a new city, built from scratch. In the late 60s, the posh colonies of south Delhi did not exist. They are unlivable now only because of poor urban planning. Delhi's planners completely failed to anticipate the automobile revolution. Localities built by the Delhi Development Authority have 'scooter garages'. They are swamped by cars today, and there is no place to park. These DDA localities should first be demolished and rebuilt by private developers. The judge who heartlessly ordered demolitions was sticking to the letter of the law. How did these laws come about? Here, we find that babus were delegated powers to pass these rules. They were not passed by any representative body, and hence possess not a shred of democratic legitimacy.
The judge was not only heartless, he was also thoughtless, for what will now transpire is massive blackmailing. When faced with a babu armed with demolition orders, property owners will be forced to fork out huge sums. They will live in constant fear and trepidation. Rather than the rule of law, what will transpire is more illegality and insecurity. As for urban villages, its original inhabitants owned extensive tracts of land that were usurped by the state, for low compensation. These villages were kept poor and denied every urban amenity. Hauz Khas, Zamrudpur, Katwaria Sarai and Mehrauli became ghettoes. If they are seeing property development today, the resultant gains should not be denied to these victims of 'rural development'. Bulldozing constructions in these neglected enclaves is therefore a great injustice. Both custom as well as the letter of the law do not permit it.
Keeping these four basic truths in mind, this judicial order must be seen as an instrument of tyranny and injustice. Its purpose is to divert blame for all our urban problems on private property owners and developers. Authorities who cannot clear garbage, who cannot build roads good enough to withstand Delhi's scanty rains, who cannot regulate traffic and keep pedestrians secure — it is these autho-rities whose 'authorisations' have secured judicial support. Cities do not need building bye-laws and zoning restrictions. If there were relief in torts, building bye-laws would be totally unnecessary. Similarly, a healthy mix of commercial and residential properties in a locality is a natural outcome of liberty, and is in the interest of the residents. Normally, a shopkeeper would build his house atop his shop. Private residents would thus find it easy to shop near one's home. With zoning restrictions, we are forced to drive to the nearest market.
Commercial activity in any area actually serves to raise property prices of those who own residences there. We can therefore contemplate a future without urban planning, no building bye-laws and no zoning restrictions. All that the city fathers would have to take care of would be 'public properties' like roads and parks. Any encroachments on these, of course, should be demolished. Our freedoms end where our properties end. We can then make the whole of India a great piece of real estate. The writer is an economist
No comments:
Post a Comment