Image Credits: WSJ
Dairy farming had to move from the centre of Delhi to the outskirts due to the city's urban growth in the middle of the 1970s. This initiative was led by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), which established several dairy colonies throughout the city. The purpose of these colonies was to create specific areas where milk production could go on without interfering with city life. Dairy farmers were given a 99-year lease on the land for these colonies, with the understanding that the regions would continue to be used for dairy production.
These colonies were initially situated outside of Delhi, far from the major residential and business districts of the city. The chosen sites were agricultural areas that had enough grasslands, lakes, and ponds to support dairy farming. But as Delhi's borders grew, these regions were incorporated more deeply into the city's urban structure, posing additional difficulties.
The city now has eleven officially recognised dairy colonies, three of which are run by the DDA and the others by the MCD. These colonies are now at risk because of the changing dynamics of urban expansion, which has sparked discussions about how to strike a balance between development and the preservation of traditional livelihoods. The 1976-founded Bhalswa Dairy Colony is one example of such a colony. Bhalswa, like other colonies, was designed to be a community of dairy farmers with the facilities they needed to make a living. The colony is currently in danger of being demolished and relocated due to continuous urban growth, which raises questions about these communities' future. The current situation reflects the broader issues faced by all of Delhi’s dairy colonies.
Similar to numerous other dairy colonies in Delhi, the Bhalswa Dairy Colony was founded to offer a specific area for dairy production away from the bustle of the city. However, its slow decline was caused by inadequate urban planning and the absence of infrastructure needed to support dairy farms. The difficulties Bhalswa Dairy Colony has encountered serve as a stark reminder of the shortcomings in urban planning that have negatively affected these colonies' ability to survive.
The availability of water was one of the main problems. At first, the colony contained lakes and ponds where cattle could graze and take baths. But eventually, the farmers were unable to reach these pools of water because they were walled off. Because of the high salinity of the local groundwater, it was not only unhealthy for the cattle but also unfit for human consumption. Dairy farmers, who mostly depend on water to maintain cleanliness, had to find alternate water supplies or treatment techniques, which further raised operating expenses and made it harder to maintain the health of the animals.
Furthermore, unapproved residential colonies were progressively built on the agricultural grounds that were initially available when the colony was founded. The farmers were forced to buy pricey feed because there was no more grazing pasture for the livestock. When compared to other states where water and feed are more reasonably priced, the cost of running a dairy farm in Delhi grew more and more unfeasible.
This was made worse by a significant storm that hit the region on June 3, 1983. The tin shelters originally erected by the dairy producers suffered severe damage during the storm. The lives of animals and people were at risk when the sheds were blown away. In order to safeguard themselves and their animals against future disasters, the locals were compelled to build more permanent "pukka" homes.
Due to land encroachment and the MCD's inaction, the planned installation of a biogas plant in Bhalswa Dairy Colony—which was meant to assist the dairy operations that are essential to the local economy—has encountered major obstacles. The project's goal is being undermined by the illegal usage of land that was originally set aside for this crucial infrastructure. The MCD has failed to address this encroachment, which has led to a persistent lack of development and necessary facilities for maintaining dairy farming, despite the biogas plant's significance for sustainable dairy farming.
Due to these challenges, many residents in Bhalswa Dairy Colony ceased raising dairy. Originally intended to be a centre for dairy production, the colony has changed, with 86% of the area now being used for residential purposes and only 14% of the land still being used for dairy farming. This alteration is a reflection of the more significant issues that all of Delhi's dairy colonies are dealing with, as it is nearly hard to uphold the colonies' original purpose due to poor design and a lack of support.
The entire idea of specialised dairy colonies has declined as a result of the lack of infrastructure and support for dairy farming, which has also had an impact on farmers' livelihoods.
The circumstances of Bhalswa Dairy Colony bring up important moral and legal issues about land usage and the obligations of the local government and citizens. Legally, a 99-year lease was initially granted for the land's use in dairy farming. But as time went on, the locals started to use the property for residential reasons. Significant legal issues have resulted from this change, which was prompted by the economic impossibility of sustaining dairy farms for a number of reasons, including a lack of infrastructure and support.
From a legal perspective, land use infractions are the main problem. Technically, the original lease agreement has been broken because the area intended for dairy production has been converted to residential usage. The fact that the residents have been paying house taxes since 2004 complicates this matter, nevertheless. By imposing these taxes, the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) has essentially acknowledged and treated the land as residential property. A school, two community centres, a dispensary, street lights, drainage systems, and other facilities have also been supplied by the government. The idea that the area is being treated like a residential colony is further supported by these actions.
Whether the inhabitants or the officials are at fault is the moral conundrum here. The locals were forced to convert their land to residential use due to the economic fact that dairy production was no longer sustainable. Instead of occupying more property, they have modified the land that was given to them to suit their needs. Their homes have grown established over time, and presently the neighbourhood is home to multigenerational families.
On the other hand, the authorities have allowed this transformation to occur by collecting house taxes and providing residential amenities. This creates a moral obligation on the part of the government to recognize the realities on the ground. The government's own long-standing designation of the area as a residential colony appears to be at odds with the sudden decision to demolish these homes as mandated by the courts.
The problem is made more difficult by the proposed transfer of the remaining dairy activities to Ghogha Dairy Colony, which would leave Bhalswa entirely residential. The ethical case against demolition is compelling if the place is already operating as a residential colony, complete with all the amenities and infrastructure that go along with it.Dismantling a long-standing community without providing appropriate alternatives or considering the long-term impacts on its inhabitants seems unjust.
Although the inhabitants' conversion of their property technically violated the original lease restrictions, the authorities' actions over the years have essentially approved this transformation. Therefore, the issue of accountability rests mostly on the authorities, who are now in charge of coming up with a solution that takes into account the dairy colony's established realities as a residential area.
Image Credits: The Hindu
The government's stance on the demolition campaigns is predicated on the enforcement of land use rules, citing the unlawful residential conversion of land originally intended for dairy production. However, it may be argued that instead of using demolition, the authorities could have looked into other options, such as regularising the existing residential structures or offering sufficient compensation and assistance for relocation. A lack of respect for the human impact and the investments made by the impacted people—many of whom sold their land in villages to relocate here—is evident in these measures, which disregard their long-standing residency and compliance.
Demolition efforts, a typical strategy employed by local governments and development agencies, have had a detrimental effect on India's urban landscape. These initiatives often tread on the thin line between progress and human rights, despite their professed aim of enhancing urban infrastructure and aesthetics. The impoverished, the disenfranchised, and those living on the outskirts of society are disproportionately affected by these violent evictions. Since they usually lack the resources and influence to navigate the convoluted legal system, these groups are at the mercy of the government. Residents are often surprised and depressed by the speed with which these demolitions are carried out, frequently without sufficient notice or compensation.
Additionally, these demolitions might have a negative impact on the environment. Destroying historic buildings and green spaces can exacerbate urban heat islands, which increases air pollution and energy consumption. In addition to upsetting delicate ecological balances, destroying wetlands and natural water bodies can lower the amount of water available, raise the risk of flooding, and more.
In recent years, public indignation against these draconian tactics has increased. Civil society organisations and impacted communities have united to challenge these demolitions in public and legal settings. International human rights organisations have also expressed concern about the violations of human rights associated with these forced evictions.
To reduce the harmful impacts of demolition operations, authorities must approach urban development with greater compassion and equity. To ensure the rights and welfare of affected communities, robust rehabilitation initiatives, equitable restitution, and transparent decision-making processes are required. By striking a balance between social justice and advancement, it is possible to create prosperous, inclusive cities that do not leave anyone behind.
In conclusion, the Bhalswa Dairy case emphasises the necessity of a clear and uniform land-use policy in Delhi. A larger problem of poor urban planning is highlighted by the government's inconsistent activities, which include providing residential services and collecting taxes while also issuing sudden demolition notices. This discrepancy not only upends the lives of long-time citizens, but it also illustrates the ambiguity of governmental functions. Stability should be given top priority in effective urban planning to prevent needless displacement in the future from decisions made today. In order to prevent the recurring cycle of relocation and to promote a sustainable urban environment for everybody, careful governance is essential.
By Garvika Lohia
Garvika Lohia is a sophomore student at Hindu College (Delhi University) pursuing a degree in Sociology Honors. She is deeply committed to animal welfare and aims to be a voice for the voiceless. Combining her academic focus with her passion for animals, she seeks to examine the societal attitudes and practices surrounding animal welfare, with a focus on the ethical responsibilities we hold toward them.
References
留言