Sie sind auf Seite 1von 3

Right to Housing/ Shelter

Introduction
-

Property determines ones status in society. It is a symbol of wealth and influence.


The right to residence and settlement guaranteed by 19(1)(e) remains a mere illusion

unless the State assists them by providing access to shelter and food.
An expanded meaning of Article 21 must be adopted. Such a reading would cover a

variety of rights to ensure the right to life is meaningful


The Preamble promises social and economic justice and opportunity to promote the

dignity of the individual


Article 39(b) states that ownership of material resources must be used to promote
welfare of the people. This means to minimise the inequalities in income and try to

remove inequalities in status.


UDHR Art 25 and ICESCR Art 11(1)- guarantee the right to an adequate standard
of living to all

Housing by Government- Policies and Programmes


-

The earliest housing programme was the rehabilitation of refugees after partition
Since then, various schemes for urban areas and rural areas have been framed
First housing policy in 1988, followed by New National Housing Policy in 1994
National Housing and Habitat Policy 1998- involved various stakeholders, dealt with

repeal of the Urban land ceiling act, permitted FDI in housing and real estate.
Policy of 2007 focussed more on challenges of shelter and growth of slums
A conference of CMs in 1996 included the provision of public housing assistance as

a part of a Basic Minimum Services programme


The 1998 Policy also changed the role of government- from a provider of housing to a

facilitator and enabler for the poor.


In the rural sector, the Rural landless employment guarantee scheme was launched in

1985.
The major scheme for rural areas is the Indira Awas Yojana (1999)- aimed to replace

all kaccha makaans from rural india


Fully subsidised (cost shared by centre and state 75:25) would involve

beneficiaries in the construction of their houses


The states were responsible to facilitate the building using low cost, eco-friendly
technology no contractors were involved funds released directly to the

beneficiaries
Problems in selection- selection conducted by Gram Sabha leads to influential
families being selected only landed persons getting funds assistance inadequate,
leads to poor quality

Bharat Nirman Programme- Non targeted programme works for social inclusion

bu recognising poverty is linked to the absence of social infrastructure


BNP was launched in 2005 construction of social economic rural infrastructure

irrigation, wells, electrification, roads, HOUSES, telephone lines.


The Housing component 60 lac houses built included sanitary latrines

ownership in name of female member


National Urban Housing and Habitat Policy 2007- Affordable housing to

complement poverty alleviation policies.


Understands the demand and supply gap introduced methods such as Mortgage
Backed Securitization Market and other mortgage based schemes operated on PPP

model with fiscal concessions for housing


Put onus of urban planning on local authorities also provided increased flow of

funds and special incentives.


Also attempted to provide training to construction workers.
The JNNURM also had guidelines related to urban housing financial assistance

ensured the states would incentivize use of land for housing.


Implemented in 65 cities as a part of the Basic Services to Urban Poor as well as in

non-mission cities.
Two criteria had to be met for projects to be eligible for assistance- minimum area of

each unit must be 1200 sq ft and upper ceiling on sale price


Government would- identify land, negotiate price, involve NGOs and other
stakeholders, ensure minimal stamp duty and registration charges, ensure transparent

allotment
Rajiv Awas Yojana (Under the JNNURM) similar to IAY but for urban slum
dwellers state support to assign property rights to slum dwellers

Right to Shelter as a Fundamental Right


-

Francis Coralie v UoI (SC 1981) Right to life means life with dignity includes

shelter
Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation (SC 1985)BMC sought to evict
street dwellers and squatters without law HELD that such an eviction from
dwellings would violate right to livelihood which is part of Article 21 close nexus
between right to life and livelihood if not possible to live then no livelihood. That
which makes life liveable must be fundamental right. (Allowed eviction with due
notice)

K Chandru v TN (SC 1986) Slum eviction by govt OBSERVED that right to


life is wide and far reaching, however can be be extinguished by procedure cannot
take away right to livelihood either results in loss of right to life in the case,

alternative rehabilitation was provided no violation of 21 and eviction allowed.


Shantistar Builders v Totame (SC 1990) Right to life includes decent and
reasonable accommodation not only bare animal like shelter but suitable
accommodation which allows him to grow in every aspect must aim to ensure fuller

development of every child


Gauri Shanker v UoI (SC 1995) Statute placed restriction on rights of heirs of
residential premises challenged as violative of 21 HELD right to shelter not
absolutely constitutionally guaranteed restrictions on right by statute were

reasonable.
P Gupta v Gujarat (SC 1995) Right to residence and settlement fundamental
under Art 19 facet of meaningful right to life under Art 21 imperative that state
make provisions for permanent housing which would be within economic means of

the poor
Karnataka v Narasimhamurthy (SC 1996) Right is only meaningful id State
provides facilities Acquisition for this purpose is for public purpose

Judicial Approach (in context of acquisition)


-

Recognised provision of housing as a public purpose which can qualify under the

urgency clause
Kasiredi Papaiah v AP (APHC 1975) Court appraised of appalling condition of
SC and ST houses in such a circumstance, emergency provision of land acquisition

was justified.
UP v Pista Devi ( SC 1986) Here, urgency clause justified due to problem faced by

enormous growth of population in urban areas


Chameli Singh v UP (SC 1996) Delay in notification of rehabilitation is in itself
ground to invoke emergency clause.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen