1. Pursuant to this Courts order dated 5-11-1996 officers representing DDA, Railways, and CPWD are present in court.

2. Mr R.K. Bhandari, Engineer Member, DDA is present on behalf of DDA. We have heard Mr Bhandari. Mr Bhandari states that as back as 1993, DDA requested MCD to take over 382 colonies which had been fully developed by DDA. He further states that 63 colonies have been taken over by MCD and a joint inspection regarding 28 colonies has already been done. Mr Bhandari further states that necessary payment required to be made has also been made to MCD. According to Mr Bhandari the joint inspection pertaining to the rest of the colonies has not as yet been done.

3. On behalf of MCD, Mr D. Mukhopadhya, Director, Conservancy (I), Engineering is present. He is not in a position to tell us as to why these colonies are not being taken over. Mr Jaitley, learned counsel appearing for MCD suggests that there should be a meeting between the Vice Chairman of DDA and the Commissioner, MCD to sort out this problem. We agree with this suggestion. We request the Vice Chairman of DDA and also the Commissioner, MCD to sort out this problem by whatever means they think best in the circumstances of this case. We would appreciate if the work of cleaning of these colonies is taken over as per the decision of the two officers within one week from today.

4. While we are in the process of monitoring the cleanliness drive in the city of Delhi, a serious problem has been brought to our notice. It is stated by Mr Arun Jaitley, learned counsel for MCD and by other learned counsel assisting us that there are about four lakh jhuggis unauthorisedly set up in various parts of Delhi. Mr K.B.L. Mittal, Additional Divisional Railway Manager, who is present in court states that there are 21,000 jhuggis on both sides of the railway tracks. He states that these jhuggis are in existence for a very long period. We take judicial notice of the fact that in this country where about 30 per cent of the people are living below the poverty line, this type of problem is but natural. Primarily, it is for the Government of the day to sort out this problem but unfortunately there is total lack of application of mind on the part of the Government in this respect. The Government is under a constitutional obligation to provide shelter to the people. This is the mandate under Art.21 of the Constitution of India. Mr Jaitley suggests that before any viable solution can be found it is necessary to have the Union of India before us. Other authorities are already before us. We issue notice to the Government of India, through the Ministry of Urban Development, to be present in court on the next date of hearing. Meanwhile, we request the Commissioner, MCD; Chairperson, NDMC; Vice Chairman, DDA; General Manager, Northern Railway; General Manager, MTNL; Chief Engineer, CPWD; Secretary, Urban Development, NCT, Delhi Administration; and Secretary, PWD, NCT, Delhi Administration to get together and apply their mind to this problem and file a report in this Court within 10 days from today. We direct the Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Urban Development to hold a meeting in this respect within four days of the receipt of this order. Report to this Court shall also be sent by the Secretary to Union of India, Ministry of Urban Development.

5. We would request these officers to give a serious consideration to this problem as the city of Delhi is heading towards a situation where it is likely to develop a number of permanent slums which may not be cured for a long time to come.

6. List this matter on 2-12-1996.

7. On behalf of CPWD, Mr R.P. Bhardwaj, Superintendent Engineer, CPWD is present. He states that the Department has no colony or any areas under its control and as such the question of cleaning the area does not arise. Mr Ranjit Kumar, learned counsel for NDMC states that NDMC is doing its job of cleaning the city in the NDMC areas.

8. So far as PWD is concerned, none is present from the Department but Mr N.N. Goswami, learned counsel for NCT, Delhi Administration has assisted us in this matter. Mr Jaitley states that there is an area of about 254 kilometres of road under the control of PWD. There is some dispute between PWD and MCD in this matter which has not till date been resolved. Apart from that, PWD has some colonies like the Police Colony and other colonies for which they are responsible to keep clean. On the suggestion of Mr Jaitley, we direct the Secretary, PWD, NCT, Delhi Administration and the Commissioner, MCD to hold a joint meeting to resolve this matter. This may be done within 10 days from today. List on 2-12-1996.

9. No one is present on behalf of MTNL.

10. This Court by the order dated 27-8-1996, took note of the fact that the Chief Secretary, NCT, Delhi Administration, who was present in court, was to consider appointing senior citizens like retired bureaucrats, advocates and others as Municipal Magistrates under S.469 of the MCD Act. In our order we stated that the needful should be done as early as possible. Till date the Magistrates have not been appointed. All the directions given by this Court in its judgment dated 1-3-1996 (B. L. Wadehra (Dr) v. Union of India, 1996 (2) SCC 594 [LQ/SC/1996/538] ) have been rendered almost inoperative because unless the Magistrates are appointed, the other directions cannot be properly worked out. We are of the view that despite the Chief Secretary being personally present in court and our personally requesting him to take up this matter on a war footing, he has acted in a casual manner. The list of the persons who were to be appointed as Magistrates was finalised on 30-10-1996. Almost a month after the order was passed by this Court in the presence of the Chief Secretary, a letter was written on 30-10-1996 to the High Court to initiate the process of consultation. No reminder thereafter seems to have been sent though it is stated that the Registrar, Delhi High Court was contacted personally. Before we initiate contempt proceedings against the Chief Secretary, we direct the Chief Secretary -- request having failed -- to have this matter expedited and finalise it within 10 days from today. We further direct the Registrar, Delhi High Court to place the matter before the Chief Justice, Delhi High Court for the consideration of the learned Chief Justice. It may be brought to the notice of the Chief Justice, Delhi High Court that the Magistrates are being appointed pursuant to the judicial order of this Court dated 1-3-1996 (B. L. Wadehra (Dr) v. Union of India, 1996 (2) SCC 594 [LQ/SC/1996/538] ). The Chief Secretary, NCT, Delhi Administration shall depute a special officer to go to the High Court, have the matter finalised and issue the notification within the period of 10 days. List this matter on 2-12-1996.

11. Incinerator matter to come up on 2-12-1996.

12. Orders to be sent to all concerned today.