By Dr Asha Lal
The dream of a clean, green, and organised Dehradun is noble. But when that dream comes at the cost of uprooting thousands of lives, it demands deeper reflection. The ongoing eviction drives near the Bindal and Rispana rivers, aimed at removing so-called “encroachments”, have triggered widespread concern—not just about legality, but about humanity.
Slums: More Than Just Structures
The settlements that line the rivers are not just physical structures; they are homes. Generations of families have lived here. Children have grown up, gone to school, cast their first vote, and nurtured dreams within these modest homes. To declare these communities illegal overnight, without comprehensive surveys, legal recourse, or humane alternatives, is an act of bureaucratic violence.
Most residents are part of the city’s invisible workforce—cleaners, domestic workers, security guards, rickshaw pullers, and construction labourers. Their contribution to urban life is often acknowledged only when their absence is felt.
Government’s 30 June Deadline Raises Alarm
The Uttarakhand government has informed the High Court that all encroachments along the Bindal and Rispana rivers will be cleared by 30 June 2025. While the goal is to rejuvenate the rivers and prevent urban flooding, the absence of a clearly defined rehabilitation plan for the thousands who live in these areas raises serious questions.
Evictions are reportedly being executed swiftly and, in many cases, without adequate notice or alternative arrangements—prompting criticism from civil society groups and legal experts alike.
Environmental Justice Cannot Ignore Human Justice
The commitment to restoring rivers is admirable. But if environmental protection becomes synonymous with eviction of only the urban poor, we must ask: is this justice, or selective enforcement?
Why are riverside slums being demolished while encroachments by elite bungalows, hotels, and private institutions often remain untouched?
Displacement Without Rehabilitation is Injustice
Evictions are being carried out with little to no transparent rehabilitation policy. There is no assurance of in-situ resettlement, no accessible alternative housing, and in many cases, no legal notices. This violates basic principles of natural justice and the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
In the landmark case Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985), the Supreme Court ruled that the right to livelihood is an integral part of the right to life. To displace families without offering viable alternatives is not only unconstitutional but also inhumane.
A City for All, Not a City for a Few
Urban renewal must not come at the expense of urban exclusion. Dehradun is not just the city of well-planned colonies and high-rises; it is also the city of those who build and maintain them. Their place in the city must be protected, not erased.
The way forward lies in inclusive planning—through regularisation of eligible slums, infrastructure upgradation, and in-situ housing models, many of which have been successfully implemented in other Indian cities.
The Need for a Humane Policy Framework
The state must urgently bring clarity to its urban housing and slum regularisation policy. Rehabilitation must be part of the planning process, not an afterthought. Eviction without resettlement is not ‘clean-up’; it is cleansing—and it violates the values of a democratic, compassionate society.
Conclusion
A river cannot be saved by drowning its people. As Dehradun marches toward modernity, it must carry along all its citizens—especially the most vulnerable. Development must not be defined by how many are removed, but by how many are included.
The voices of the urban poor matter. They must not be silenced in the name of beautification.
(Dr Asha Lal is a Social Activist)
