Seal of approval

Any hopes that the government and the brazen shopkeepers had of getting away with blatant violation of the Capital's laws governing the use of land for residential and commercial purposes, have been scotched. The Supreme Court has rightly come down hard on the government for not implementing its orders for nearly nine months, first by asking for more time to clean up the mess, then by trying to change the Master Plan to legitimise all illegal land usage, and finally by citing a law and order problem that it had helped create. The Bench, headed by the Chief Justice, asked that if public reaction was to be the criterion for government action and implementing of court orders, what would have happened in the case of the anti-Sikh riots of 1984, the 1993 Mumbai riots and the 2002 Gujarat riots; the court added that 25,000 shopkeepers could not blackmail the government. In short, the Court has called the government's bluff. What will the latter do now? It is a safe bet that it will continue to look for alternatives.

One which has been debated is to pass a law and place it under the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution, which would prevent the courts from examining its legal validity. But the Court has already taken a dim view of this, so such a course of action may not achieve the intended results. Another possibility being worked on is to allow the sealing to re-start, and then to move quickly on drawing up a new master plan for the city that will legalise things later. Since this too is a transparent ploy, some prominent architects and town planners have already petitioned the Chief Justice, asking him to ensure that any new master plan is approved by an independent agency!

The Court is right in insisting that the government implement its own laws. However, there is no getting away from the fact that the government is in a bind since it simply does not have the will to seal such a large number of buildings; indeed, almost no action has been taken so far against all the corrupt officials who allowed illegal buildings and non-permissible land use to take place. The traders for their part have tasted blood, for whenever the agitation has turned violent, the sealing work has been put off. Noisy and even violent protests are therefore to be expected. Under normal circumstances, it would be legitimate for the government to ask for more time, but given how it has behaved by putting a year's moratorium on the sealing (which would buy time to work out permanent alternatives), the Courts are justifiably sceptical. Under the circumstances, the government's best bet is to go after the so-called "big fish" first, to re-establish its credibility.

In some of the up-market colonies in South Delhi, for instance, it is unlikely that traders will be able to get the residents as agitated as they could in lower-middle class Seelampur, where some persons died after the police opened fire when they were pelted with stones and small rocks. Once some credibility is restored, a time-bound action plan, supervised by the Court's monitoring committee, should help clean up Delhi. The committee has to ensure that the authorities do not rush in to seal illegal buildings in crowded localities till much later, and only with adequate police backup; otherwise there will be a repeat of what happened in Seelampur""which is just what the traders and many in the government want.