Page 3

Published in IIPS Mumbai, ENVIS center, Volume 5, No. 1, March 2008

Slum Conditions in Mumbai with Reference to the Access of

Civic Amenities

Grace Bahalen Mundu

PhD Scholar, International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS), Deonar, Mumbai, India ( E-mail : grace.mundu@gmail.com)

R.B. Bhagat

Professor, Department of Migration and Urban Studies, International Institute for Population Sciences (IIPS), Deonar, Mumbai, India ( E-mail : rbbhagat@iips.net)

Abstract

Millennium Development Goal targets to halve the proportion of population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation by 2015 and aims to achieve a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers. The large size of slum population has posed several challenges to the policy makers and program planners in the developing countries. This paper presents the living conditions of slum dwellers in Mumbai. Most of the slum dwellers in Mumbai lack the basic necessities of life. In spite of many slums got notified by the government, one tap is shared by more than thousand persons in some of the slum compared to an average of 52 persons per tap. One third of the household have no access to electricity and most of the households share community toilets. This shows that lots of work still to be done to improve the lives in slums. In spite of several government policies, there is a need to improve the life of slum dwellers through community participation.

Introduction: Urbanization has been taking pace significantly in numerous developing countries including India. The urban population increased by almost ten times between the years 1901 to 2001 and number of urban settlements near doubled during this period from 1916 in 1901 to 5161 in 2001 in India. Although small towns are numerous, the 400 odd cities harbor about two-third of India’s urban population (68.48 percent). These urban centers offering diverse employment opportunities and means of livelihood are the main centers of attraction for migration, despite the fact that physical infrastructure in terms of housing, drinking water supply; drainage etc. are inadequate (Registrar General of India, 2001).

Therefore, quality of life has suffered in these urban centres not only due to migration but more so due to expanding gap between the demand and supply of necessary services and other infrastructure facilities. Unchecked land prices and unaffordable housing forced the poor to search for informal solutions resulting in mushrooming of slums and squatter settlements (Retnaraj, 2001). Slum develops on peripheral and marginal lands on the outskirts of city, on hills, slopes and low lying areas, and also on the land which has little use to the owner in near future. They also developed on the land left unused by public bodies like Railways, Municipal Corporation, Port Trust etc. (Nangia and Gupta, 1993).

The problem of slums has been faced at some point of time by almost all the major cities throughout the developing world. Nowadays slums have become an integral part of urbanization and are in a way manifestation of overall socio-economic policies and planning. Slums dwellers have been contributing significantly to the economy of the city by being a source of affordable labour supply for production both in formal and informal sectors of economy (Registrar General and Census Commissioner, India, 2001).

Today 3 billion people, nearly half of the World’s population lives in cities. One-third of them are slum dwellers. Moreover, four out of ten inhabitants in the developing world are living in informal shelters. They experience manifold deprivations not only houses unfit for habitation but also lack of adequate food, education health and basic services. As such, slum improvement is not only a goal for a better quality of life, but also provides a positive impact on the health burden and the economic development of a country. Slums in the world are the face of urban poverty in the new Millennium (UN-HABITAT, 2003).

Millennium Development Goal declares “Ensure Environmental Sustainability” as one of the eight goals; by 2015 it targets to halve the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation and by 2020 to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers (UN, 2009). Achieving the goals set in Millennium Development Goals is not possible if the health conditions of slum dwellers are not improved (Agarwal et. al, 2007)

The phenomenon of slum is worldwide and no country or no city in any country is without slums even in Europe and America but the definition and type varies from place to place. As the capitalist mode of production started in 18^th century, poverty, unemployment, lack of employment in rural areas and over population are the factors responsible for the existence of slums everywhere. No nation has ever been able to prevent the emergence of slums (Abrams, 1970). In United States slums are associated with ethnicity. Majority of blacks in urban America have been from the beginning living in slums. Besides them, the early slums in United States were created by poor European immigrants who came in search of work (Grodzins, 1970).

Slums are characterised by high concentrations of population, heterogeneous and ethnically multiracial population, largely inhabited by poor and socially weaker. Local administrations always failed to provide urban civic amenities and sewage facilities.

Origin of Slums in Mumbai

Some of the worst slums in the world can be found in Indian cities. Due to the lack of infrastructure and planning in the cities, they are helpless of accommodating the increasing flow of migrants from the rural areas (Desai and Pillai, 1970).

Slums are linked with the British rule in India. A majority of the rural migrants, displaced in the process of colonial development, migrated to large cities for seeking employment. The industries and city administration were not concerned to provide adequate shelters to the migrants. In some cities, particularly in the states of Maharashtra and Gujarat, industrialists tried to attract and retain them by providing small tenements or multi storied row houses in the pattern of army barracks, called ‘Chawls’, mostly built in 19^th century. Over time, due to lack of maintenance, dilapidation etc. most of the chawls have become extremely poor in terms of quality of life (Kundu, 2005). Poverty is the main reason behind the slums and slums breed hopelessness and crime. The key reason is the slow economic progress. By mid sixties in India Mumbai, Kolkata, Delhi and all other large cities were dotted with slums (South Asian Analysis Group, 2006).

The main reason behind the origin of Bombay’s slums can be traced to its development as an important political and economic centre of the country. It fascinated a large number of people from the rural and small town areas. After the Second World War there is subsequent rise in population due to economic upheaval. Private enterprise constructed houses with a maximum profit motive which gave birth to buildings known as chawls.

These chawls consist of number or tenements, usually one small room for each family and served by water-closets and water taps for all families. Some of them are even five to six storied. Lack of town planning and satisfactory standards lay down by law in respect to minimum accommodation and sanitation the growth of Mumbai went haphazard. And the gradual decay and neglecting of those chawls makes unfit for human living. Later on these chawls got overcrowded and congested, lack of hygiene and sanitation converted them to slums. Slums can be grouped into: chawls, semi permanent residential structure and unauthorized huts put up on vacant lands. Various wards of Bombay reported slums before the Second World War. Population and urban growth has taken place at such a rapid pace that the housing sector has not been able to deal with this problem resulting into development of numerous slums in the city.

The biggest slum of Asia Dharavi is situated in G ward, comprising small fishermen village and low lying marshy land. After the post-war period there is gradual rise in population and resulting shortage of housing. These migrants chose the so called slum area for their huts, made-up of pieces of old tin, bamboo etc. These huts are characterized by lack of open space between the huts and waste water from the huts without the proper drainage facility resulting into dampness (Bombay Municipal Corporation, 1970).

The slum population swells not only due to the migration from the rural areas but also because of increasing poverty and failure of the local self government to provide basic amenities to the people, which is forcing a large segment of population to live in slums. It is also possible that some of the localities because of continued lack of infrastructure over time have degenerated and turned into slums. Awareness and utilization of loan facility in almost all the places is very low, resulting in almost no utilization of available credit facility. Study shows that in order to improve the life of slum dwellers major initiatives are required at all fronts. It includes provision of basic amenities, education and vocational training, health care and promotion of income generating activities (Operational Research Group, 1989).

Quality of Life in Slums

Decent housing is a basic human need and a basic human right. But in many developing countries including Latin America, urban population continues to grow at a rapid pace and providing safe, sanitary, affordable housing and basic infrastructure for all citizens will become an increasingly serious challenge for the policymakers. Slum upgrading and participation can improve their housing conditions (Imparato and Ruster, 2003).

Studies indicate that the prevalence of diseases (pneumonia, diarrhea, malaria, measles and HIV/AIDS) in urban slums is due to bad living conditions rather than income levels. For example there is lack of safe drinking water and pit latrines shared by thousands of people. Children from the slums with higher income group have higher rates of diarrhea than children of poorest rural families because they are exposed to contaminated water and food. Pneumonia and diarrhea each kill more than 2 million children in developing countries annually. Higher the prevalence of slums in the cities, greater will be the prevalence of diarrheal infections among the urban population (UN-HABITAT, 2006-07).

Quality of life of the migrants in slums is most adversely affected; living in unhygienic and congested places devoid of basic necessities for a healthy life like housing, water supply, drainage and sanitation, slums are also the breeding ground for crime, pollution and health hazards (Bhandari and Basu, 2000). Women and children are the worst victims. Physically, mentally and emotionally they are affected. The rapid growth of slums and squatter settlements has largely contributed to the social, economic and environmental problems in urban areas. The rehabilitation programme of slum clearance board is totally inadequate in relation to the mushroom growth of slums. (Sundari, 2001).

Socio-economic conditions of slum dwellers indicated that a majority of slum dwellers were migrants from different places, and were of unskilled with low occupational status and low incomes. Therefore the policy makers should recognize that just providing a house and even a better environment to live cannot solve the problem of growth of slums which has its roots in the very demand for low valued informal occupations (Rao, 1991).

Providing adequate shelter in cities of developing countries has been a fundamental problem for national and municipal governments for more than a quarter of a century (Rondinelli, 1990). World leaders, governments and international agencies are trying to take direct action to improve the living conditions of slum dwellers and to offer adequate solutions for the slum tomorrow (UN, 2009). Slums and squatter settlements are the clear indication of the failure of government and society to provide adequate habitat for human development. The term ‘slum’ is used to indicate housing which falls below a certain level, better housing is necessary the human development (Aldrich and Sandhu, 1995).

Table1: Population Size and Growth Rate, Greater Mumbai, 1981-2000.

Year	Greater Mumbai (M. Corp.)	Greater Mumbai (U.A)	Greater Mumbai (M. Corp.)	Greater Mumbai (U.A)
	Population		Annual Growth Rate (%)
1981	8,243,405	9,421,962	-	-
1991	9,925,891	12,596,243	1.86	2.90
2001	11,914,398	16,434,386	1.83	2.65

Note. U.A. – Urban Agglomeration

M. Corp. -Municipal Corporation

Source: Registrar General and Census Commissioner, 2001, Census of India: Maharashtra Population Data with Slum Population in Urban Units, Mumbai

Table 1 presents the population size and growth rate of Greater Mumbai (Municipal Corporation and Urban Agglomeration) for the year 1981 to 2001. The table shows that the population of Greater Mumbai increased more in Mumbai Urban agglomeration area compared to the city area within the Mumbai Municipal Corporation. On the other hand, the growth rate in Mumbai Municipal Corporation remained almost stable of 1.86 to 1.83 percent per annum, whereas the growth rate in Mumbai Urban Agglomeration has declined from 2.90 percent during 1981-1991 to 2.65 percent during 1991-2001.

This paper aims to present the conditions of slum dwellers in Mumbai city (M. Corp) with regard to their access to tap water, electricity, toilet facility and sewerage at the ward level.

Methodology and Data Source

Both published and unpublished data from 2001 Census a have been used in this study. In 2001 Census, an attempt was made to collect detailed demographic data about slums across the country, particularly, in cities and towns having population of 50,000 or above in 1991. Formation and identification of slum enumeration blocks prior to the conduct of 2001 Census made possible to compile and prepare special tables on slums. It is for the first time in the history of census in the country that the slum demography is being presented on the basis of the actual count. The information on different characteristic of the slum dwellers has been collected through the same census questionnaire of household schedule, which was canvassed for the population enumeration in the country at the 2001 census. Slum population has been reported from 640 cities and towns of 26 States/Union Territories. More than 72,000 enumeration blocks have been identified as slum enumeration blocks in these cities/towns which constitute nearly 22 % of the total enumeration blocks in urban areas. In the remaining 9 States/Union Territories there were no identified slums.

While census has published demographic characteristics of slums, e the information about basic amenities was available in unpublished form until recently. We have been provided the data by the Census office on number of slums ward wise, number of slum households, length of paved roads in slums, number of tap water connections, number of latrines (private and community), type of sewerage system (Sewerage, Open Surface Drains) and method of disposal of night soil. This study utilises this data and presents ward wise distribution of population in slums, distribution of tap water facility, electricity connections, toilet facility, and sewerage system in both notified and non-notified slums in Mumbai

1.6 Definitions and Concept of Slums

According to Census of India 2001, the definition of slums is as follows:

(i) All specified areas in a town or city notified as ‘slum’ by State, UT Administration or Local Government under any Act including a ‘Slum Act’.

(ii) All areas recognized as ‘slum’ by State, UT Administration or Local Government, Housing and Slum Boards, which may have not been formally notified as slum under any act;

(iii) A compact area of at least 300 populations or about 60-70 households of poorly built congested tenements, in unhygienic environment usually with inadequate infrastructure and lacking in proper sanitation and drinking water facility.

Results

Table 2: Ward Wise Distribution of Slum Population in Mumbai City, 2001

No. of Wards	Name of Wards	Total Slum Population	Slum Population (in percent)
1	(Ward A) Colaba	60,893	28.88
2	(Ward B) Sandhurst Rd.	18,746	13.33
3	(Ward C) Marine Lines	There is no Slums within the Ward Limits
4	(Ward D) Grant Rd.	38,077	9.95
5	(Ward E) Byulla	52,230	11.86
6	(Ward F/S)Parel	141,653	35.76
7	(Ward F/N) Matunga	304,500	58.07
8	(Ward G/N) Mahim/Dadar	324,886	55.82
9	(Ward G/S) Elphinstone Rd.	151,506	33.08
10	(Ward H/W) Bandra	138,541	41.06
11	(Ward H/E) Khar Santacruz	457,622	78.79
12	(Ward K/E) Andheri (E)	472,226	58.30
13	(Ward K/W) Andheri (W)	316,065	45.11
14	(Ward P/S) Goregaon	210,591	48.10
15	(Ward P/N) Malad	508,435	63.65
16	(Ward R/S) Kandivali	326,235	55.30
17	(Ward R/C) Dahisar	173,160	33.75
18	(Ward R/N) Borivali	169,662	46.63
19	(Ward L) Kurla	658,972	84.68
20	(Ward M/W) Chembur (W)	283,557	68.48
21	(Ward M/E) Chembur (E)	523,324	77.55
22	(Ward N) Ghatkopar	435,009	70.21
23	(Ward S) Bhandup	593,300	85.83
24	(Ward T) Mulund	116,250	35.21
Total	24 Wards	6,475,440	54.06

Source: Director of Census Operation, Maharashtra, Census of India 2001.

Table 2 presents percentage of slum population in different wards of Greater Mumbai. Ward C (Marine Lines) does not report slums within its boundary limits. It may be noted from this table that there is a marked variation in distribution of slum in different wards. Some of the wards reported more than 80 percent slum population i.e. Ward L 84.6 percent and Ward S 85.8 percent respectively. While in others the slum population was merely below 10 percent (Ward D) Grant Rd.

Table reveals that out of 24 wards, 10 wards comprises more than 50 percent slum population.

Table 3: Ward Wise Distribution of Basic Amenities in Slums of Mumbai, 2001

No. of Wards	Name of Wards	Persons Per Tap	HH without electricity ( % of households)	Community Toilets ( % of households)	Private Toilets ( % of households)
1	(Ward A) Colaba	-	-	100	0
2	(Ward B) Sandhurst Rd.	-	-	100	0
3	(Ward C) Marine Lines	There is no Slums within the Ward Limits
4	(Ward D) Grant Road	43	-	-	-
5	(Ward E) Byulla	-	-	-	-
6	(Ward F/S)Parel	-	2.93	100	0
7	(Ward F/N) Matunga	64	3.44	100	0
8	(Ward G/N) Mahim/Dadar	107	5.21	100	0
9	(Ward G/S) Elphinstone Rd.	59	11.63	-	-
10	(Ward H/W) Bandra	129	98.73	76.64	23.36
11	(Ward H/E) Khar Santacruz	-	-	100	0
12	(Ward K/E) Andheri (E)	6	-	100	0
13	(Ward K/W) Andheri (W)	103	16.29	100	0
14	(Ward P/S) Goregaon	101	0.00	100	0
15	(Ward P/N) Malad	119	4.91	100	0
16	(Ward R/S) Kandivali	4367	28.47	0	100
17	(Ward R/C) Dahisar	153	20.60	94.63	5.37
18	(Ward R/N) Borivali	39	44.98	100	0
19	(Ward L) Kurla	20	98.00	100	0
20	(Ward M/W) Chembur (W)	165	99.95	90.74	9.26
21	(Ward M/E) Chembur (E)	113	8.19	100	0
22	(Ward N) Ghatkopar	63	6.57	100	0
23	(Ward S) Bhandup	61	22.56	98.57	1.43
24	(Ward T) Mulund	74	20.75	100	0
Total	24 Wards	52	33.24	98.95	1.05

Source: Census of India 2001 unpublished data.

Table 3 presents distribution of accessibility to tap water facility which is shown by persons per tap, percentage of households without electricity connection and toilet facility in different slums areas of Mumbai.

Tap is the source of safe drinking water and lacking of it shows the inferior condition of slums. This is clear from the table that in Khandivali, slum dwellers are sharing a tap with more than thousand persons (4367 persons per tap). But, some wards reported better position when compared to Khandivali slums as reported e sharing of a tap with less than two hundred persons only. These are: Chembur (W) with 165 persons per tap, Borivali with 153 persons per tap, Bandra with 129 persons per tap, Malad with 119 persons per tap, Chembur (E) with 113 persons per tap, Mahim/Dharavi with 107 persons per tap, Andheri (W) with 103 persons per tap and Goregaon with 101 persons per tap. On the other hand, the situation in Andheri (E), Kurla and Borivali are much better as reported sharing of tap was less than 40 persons.

On an average one tap is shared by 52 slum dwellers in the slums of Mumbai. This is not a good condition as it shows that slum dwellers are lacking the access to tap water facility and also they are waiting for hours for the collection of water because of population pressure in these areas.

Table 3 also presents ward wise distribution of electricity connection among slum households. Some wards reported only small percentage of households not having electricity facility i.e. Parel (2.93 percent), Matunga (3.44 percent), Malad (4.91 percent), Dadar (5.21 percent), Ghatkopar (6.57 percent) and Chembur (E) (8.19 percent). These slum households are in a better condition. This means that more than 90 percent of the slum population are using electricity in these slum areas. In Goregaon slum dwellers have hundred percent electricity connections. Some noted slum areas reported households with no electricity facility are: Elphinstone Rd. (11.63 percent), Andheri (W) (16.29 percent), Kandivali (28.47 percent), Borivali (20.60 percent), Borivali (44.98 percent), Bhandup (22.56 percent) and Mulund (20.73 percent). This shows that these slums are worse in case of accessibility to electricity. Laso, the slums situated in the Deonar, Kurla, Khar and Santacruz are totally un-electrified.

On an average one-third of households don’t have electricity facility in Mumbai slums.

Toilets are the symbol of hygiene and sanitation in human life. It can be easily assessed by the number of toilets in slums and type of toilet whether it is private or public toilet.

Number of private toilets is very scanty. Only few slums reported private toilets, i.e. Slums in Bandra reported 32 toilets, Khandivali with 62 toilets, Borivali with 134 toilets, Chembur (W) with 190 toilets, and Bhandup with 150 private toilets respectively. Rest of the slums did not have a single private toilet; most of them have community toilets shared by many households. As community toilets are shared by many households so in terms of hygiene it is not as good as the private toilets. Slums in Colaba, Sandhurst Rd., Matunga, Dadar, Khar Santacruz, Parel, Elphinstone Rd., Andheri (E), Andheri (W), Goregaon, Malad, Borivali, Kurla, Chembur (E), Ghatkopar and Mulund area reported hundred percent community toilets.

In terms of percentages of households shown in Table 3, the slums of Kandivali reported hundred percent access to private toilets. Slum dwellers of this area are in a better position than the other areas in the city.

Table 4: Ward Wise Distribution of Sewerage System in Slums of Mumbai

No. of Wards	Name of Wards	Sewerage System
No. of Wards	Name of Wards	S	OSD	S/OSD
1	(Ward A) Colaba Area	S	-	-
2	(Ward B) Sandhurst Rd.	S	-	-
3	(Ward C) Marine Lines	There is no Slums within the Ward Limits
4	(Ward D) Grant Road	S	-	-
5	(Ward E) Byculla	S	-	-
6	(Ward F/S)Parel	-	OSD	-
7	(Ward F/N) Matunga	-	OSD	-
8	(Ward G/N) Dadar	S	-	-
9	(Ward G/S) Elphinstone Rd.	S	-	-
10	(Ward H/W) Bandra	S	-	-
11	(Ward H/E) Khar Santacruz	S	-	-
12	(Ward K/E) Andheri (E)		OSD	-
13	(Ward K/W) Andheri (W)	S	-	-
14	(Ward P/S) Goregaon		-	S/OSD
15	(Ward P/N) Malad	S	-
16	(Ward R/S) Kandivali	-	-	S/OSD
17	(Ward R/C) Dahisar	-	OSD	-
18	(Ward R/N) Borivali	-	OSD	-
19	(Ward L) Kurla	-	OSD	-
20	(Ward M/W) Chembur (W)	-	OSD	-
21	(Ward M/E) Chembur (E)	-	OSD	-
22	(Ward N) Ghatkopar	-	-	S/OSD
23	(Ward S) Bhandup	-	OSD	-
24	(Ward T) Mulund	-	OSD	-
Total	24 Wards	10	10	3

Source: Census of India 2001 unpublished data

Note- S= Covered Sewer

OSD=Open Surface Drains

S/OSD= Covered Sewer/Open Surface Drains

Table 4 presents ward wise distribution of sewerage system i.e., households have some facility of water outlet connected to some form of drainage system to carry away the waste-water generated by them. At the ward level table shows that ten wards like Colaba, Sandhurst Rd. Grant Road Byculla, Dadar, Elphinstone Rd., Bandra, Khar Santacruz, Andheri (W) and Malad reported to have sewerage system. Generally underground or covered drains are good for the healthy life. Open drains leads to diseases and unsanitary conditions. It is not clear from Table 4 that the slum areas in Parel, Matunga, Andheri (E), Dahisar, Borivali, Kurla, Chembur (W), Chembur (E), Bhandup and Mulund reported Open Sewerage Drains (OSD). This is not only unhygienic but also provides a ground for mosquitoand insects breeding and spread diseases during the monsoon season.

Three wards namely Goregaon, Kandivali and Chembur (E) reported both types of sewerage system (Covered sewer and open surface drains), some part of slum area reported open surface drains and some parts of slum reported covered sewerage system. It means that the sanitation level of these slums is moderately improved as compared with slums with open surface drains.

Table 5: Distribution of Notified Slums in Mumbai City, Census of India, 2001

No. of Wards	Name of Wards	Number of Notified Slums	Percentage of Notified Slums
1	(Ward A) Colaba	0	0
2	(Ward B) Sandhurst Rd.	0	0
3	(Ward C) Marine Lines	There is no Slums within the Ward Limits
4	(Ward D) Grant Road	18	100
5	(Ward E) Byulla	11	100
6	(Ward F/S)Parel	48	100
7	(Ward F/N) Matunga	0	0
8	(Ward G/N) Dadar	74	100
9	(Ward G/S) Elphinstone Rd.	71	100
10	(Ward H/W) Bandra	3	9.38
11	(Ward H/E) Khar Santacruz	18	90.00
12	(Ward K/E) Andheri (E)	1	100
13	(Ward K/W) Andheri (W)	2	40.00
14	(Ward P/S) Goregaon	3	100
15	(Ward P/N) Malad	6	100
16	(Ward R/S) Kandivali	2	8.00
17	(Ward R/C) Dahisar	82	100
18	(Ward R/N) Borivali	30	100
19	(Ward L) Kurla	232	100
20	(Ward M/W) Chembur (W)	33	100
21	(Ward M/E) Chembur (E)	39	100
22	(Ward N) Ghatkopar	22	37.29
23	(Ward S) Bhandup	188	100
24	(Ward T) Mulund	65	81.25
Total	24 Wards	948	85.87

Notified Slums in slums of Mumbai

Table 5 presents percent distribution of notified slums in all wards of Mumbai city. Most of the slums are hundred percent notified in fourteen wards which are situated in Grant Road, Parel, Byculla, Elphinstone Rd., Dadar, Goregaon, Malad, Borivali, Dahisar, Chembur (E), Chembur (W) and Bhandup. Some wards such as Khar-Santacruz having 90 percent, Mulund having 81 percent, slums notified.

Some areas such as Colaba, Sandhurst and Matunga have no notified slums. Notified means, they are r declared as slums by the government or Municipal Authority and they deserve the basic minimum requirements of shelter.

Slum Rehabilitation Policy in Mumbai

Since independence there have been some efforts at rehabilitating the population of slums and improving their conditions of living. In 1985, the government tried to rectify the problem by launching the Slum Upgradation Project. It offered secure long-term legal plot to slum households on the basis that they would invest in their housing. By generating an interest in the housing and by guaranteeing home ownership to the slum households, it is hoped to obliterate slums. Unfortunately the program targeted only 10-12% of the slum households i.e., those who were capable of upgrading their homes. It disregarded those who did not have homes at all.

Slum Rehabilitation Act 1995 was passed by Govt. of Maharashtra to protect the rights of slum dwellers and promote the development of slum areas. The Act protected from eviction anyone who could produce a document providing they lived in the city before January 1995, regardless if they lived on the pavement or other kinds of municipal land. The free housing scheme for slum-dwellers was severely criticized as the slum policy relies only on the participation of builders.

However, the scheme is good because it envisages that instead of resettlement of slum dwellers to another place it is better to upgrade these slums by providing employments, drinking water facility, electricity, toilet facility and proper drainage systems at their own locations.

6.3 Concluding Remark

A large number of slum people are migrants; most of them belong to the lower socio economic group and come from different parts of the country. The majority of the slum population is concentrated in core areas of the city because they want to live nearer to their working places and contribute significantly to the economic activity of the city.

Most of places where slum dwellers live are unhygienic to the lives. In rainy season they are more vulnerable to the diseases because most of the slums are in the low lying areas especially in the coastal cities like Mumbai. These slums are only only congested places, but also have open sewerage and lack to have private toilets. Wherever, community toilets are available they are not properly maintained and as a result people resort to open defecation. This is a big problem in Mumbai which warrants immediate attention.

Reference:

Abrams, Charles, 1970, Slums. In (ed) Desai, A. R. and S. Devadas Pillai Slums and Urbanization, Popular Prakashan, Bombay.

Agarwal, S., A. Satyavada, S. Kaushik, and R. Kumar, 2007, Urbanization, Urban Poverty and Health of the Urban Poor: Status, Challenges and the Way Forward, Demography India, Vol. 36(1): 121-134.

Bhandari, L. and K. Basu, 2000, In Action Plan for Slum Auction and Relocation for the State of Delhi. New Delhi: National Council of Applied Economic Research.

Bombay Municipal Corporation, 1956-57, Slums in Bombay, Reprinted from Brief Report on the Survey of Old Buildings in City (1956-57). In (ed) A. R. Desai and S. Devadas Pillai, Slums and Urbanization, pp 153-60, Bombay Popular Prakashan.

Desai, A. R., and S. D. Pillai, 1970, (eds.) Slums and Urbanization. Bombay: Popular Prakashan, pp 9-48.

Grodzins, Morton, 1970, The New Shame of The Cities. In (ed) Desai, A. R. and S. Devadas Pillai Slums and Urbanization, Popular Prakashan, Bombay