shelter less persons in delhi

Challenging Inclusive Growth Policies

Sponsored by

Department of Social Welfare NCT of Delhi

Shipra Maitra

Balwant Singh Mehta

INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT NIDM Building, 3rd Floor, IIPA Campus

I.P Estate, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, New Delhi-110 002 Phones – 2335 8166, 2332 1610 / Fax : 23765410

Email: [email protected], website:ihdindia.org

2007200720072007

CONTENTS

Acknowledgement i

Major Findings ii-iv

CHAPTER- I : INTRODUCTION 1-15

1.1 Characteristics of Shelterlessness 2

1.2 Shelterless in India 4

1.3 Definition and Number of Shelterless Persons 5

1.4 Census coverage of Houseless persons in Delhi 7

1.5 Concern for Shelterless in Delhi Master Plan 2021 8

1.6 Need for the Survey 9

1.7 Objectives 10

1.8 Methodology 10

1.9 Limitations of the Survey 14

CHAPTER- II : PROFILE OF THE SHELTERLESS 16-28

2.1 Locational Concentration 17

2.2 Migration 18

2.2a Reasons for Migration 19

2.3 Socio Cultural Profile 21

2.3a Caste Profile 21

2.3b Religion 22

2.3c Marital Status 23

2.4 Age group Distribution 23

2.5 Occupational Pattern 25

2.6 Level of Education 26

CHAPTER–III : WOMEN, CHILDREN AND THE ELDERLY 29-35

3.1 Demographic Characteristics 29

3.2 Level of Education 31

CHAPTER– IV : CHALLENGING INCLUSIVE GROWTH POLICIES 36-56

4.1 Economic Profile 37

4.1a Reasons for Coming to Delhi 37

4.1b Average Income Earned 38

4.1c Average Expenditure 39

4.1d Remittance 40

4.2 Livelihood Concerns 41

4.2 a Reasons for Leaving Home 41

4.2 b Dependent Family Members 41

4.2c Identification Documents (ID) 42

4.2d Strong Linkage with Native Place 43

4.2e Personal Belongings 45

4.2f Cooking Fuel 46

4.2g Duration of Stay 47

4.2h Long Working Hours 47

4.2i Changing Sleeping Place 48

4.2j Awareness and Utilisation of Night Shelters 49

4.2k Support Towards Livelihood 50

4.3 State of Basic Amenities 50

4.3a Health Concerns 50

4.3b Sanitation 52

4.3c Drinking Water 53

4.4 Risks of being Shelterless 53

4.5 Future Perception 54

4.6 Estimates of Shelterless Persons 56

CHAPTER -V GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATIONS 57-67

5.1 The Night Shelters 57

5.2 Occupancy 61

5.3 Alternatives to Housing 63

5.4 Perceptions of the Inmates 63

5.5 Major Problems 66

5.6 Future Perception 67

CHAPTER - VI CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 68-73

ANNEXURE (TABLES & QUESTIONNAIRES) I- XII 74-85

PHOTOGRAPHS 86-89

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We express sincere thanks to the Director, Ms. J. Raghuraman and Joint Director, Ms. Rashmi Singh of Department of Social Welfare (DSW), Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi, for assigning the Survey on Houslessness in Delhi to the Institute for Human Development (IHD). This study required cooperation and involvement of various persons at different level. We are grateful to the three Joint Commissioners of Police, namely, Shri Alok Kumar Verma, Shri P.R. Meena and Shri Rajesh Kumar for extending all possible helps required during the survey. All the following nine District Commissioners could find time for interview despite their busy schedules and helped us in supplying relevant data;

1. Shri H. Rajesh Prasad, DC South 2. Shri Rajib Kale, DC, South West 3. Shri Hansraj, DC, North West 4. Shri Sanjay Saxena, DC, West 5. Shri K.K. Jindal, DC North 6. Shri Ramesh Tewari, DC Central 7. Ms. Rinku Dhugga, DC, New Delhi 8. Ms. Rashmi Krishnan, DC, East 9. Dr. V. Chandvellu, DC, North East

We express sincere thanks to all of them. Local SHOs and Beat constables helped us in organizing group discussions and roaming feely at night in various localities. We met several NGOs who kindly were involved in these discussions and also helped in organizing them. We are thankful to Ms. Paramjit Kaur of Ashray Adhikar Abhiyan (AAA) for helpful discussions.

Dr. A.N. Sharma, Director, IHD, has been constant source of inspiration. He has guided us throughout the project with his widely acclaimed experience and knowledge in the field of human development. We are grateful to him for entrusting this assignment to us. Last but not the least, this work would never be completed without help from colleagues and staff of IHD. We are particularly thankful to Mr Shri Prakash Sharma and P.K. Mishra for word processing, Shri Prem Chandra, Ms. Madhavi Chauhan and Ms. Jyoti Girish for administrative help. Any errors and lapses are, however, ours.

Shipra Maitra Balwant Singh Mehta

i

MAJOR FINDINGS This report has generated data at two levels – (1) Total headcount of the shelterless and (2) the sample survey of 1997 persons, both carried out simultaneously. We targeted 2000 parsons in a detailed sample survey in order to generate a respectable critical mass but got responses from 1997 persons within the limited time period. This sample, selected at random, reflects district wise concentration of shelterless as was evident in the headcount survey. Only 92 women emerged along with 1905 males reflecting the male- dominated character of the shelterless. Similarly, religious dominance by Hindus and majority of population in the working age group were evident. The sample showed also the dominance of OBC as caste followed by the Scheduled Caste. Literacy rate has been found to be very low, much below the state average. Majority of the shelterless are married and left their families in the native places. In general, samples, taken at random, reflected the general characteristics of the shelterless persons in Delhi. Major objectives of this sample survey were to understand their conditions in depth. The questionnaire based survey focused their economic compulsions, livelihood patterns, reasons for being shelterless, duration of stay as shelterless, gains form city life, health conditions, sanitation practices, major risks of being shelterless and future plans.

The head count survey reveals that there are a total of 46788 shelterless persons in Delhi, with 39465 (84.35 per cent) men and 7323 (15.65 per cent) women.

Uttar Pradesh sends the maximum number of shelterless persons in Delhi, followed by Bihar. These two states taken together, account for about 69 per cent of total shelterless.

The migrant shelterless almost uniformly cite the single most reason for migration as job prospects near their native place.

OBCs have maximum share (about 45 per cent) of total shelterless in Delhi, share of the Scheduled Castes (SC) being second (34.05).

There are 375 children below 5 years of age forming less than one per cent of total shelterless in the capital.

The aged population (60 year and above) form almost 3 per cent of total shelterless in the capital.

Persons in the working age group constitute more than 90 per cent of the shelterless, contributing significantly to the total labour force.

Children between 11 and 14 years (3.16 percent of total shelterless population) also contribute to the labour force as many of them are employed in the informal sector despite being prevented under law.

Relatively smaller proportion of children below 5 years compared to those above 60 may also indicate high child mortality rate

The shelterless generally works as construction labourer and rickshaw puller. There is significant number of construction labourers among the women also. However, a large section of them earn their living as beggars.

The shleterless work seven days a week and 9 to 10 hours a day without any gender bias.

ii

Little children (5 to 1o years) also take to beggary (9.11%) and work as domestic workers (3.80%).

Average literacy rate of the shelterless is almost one fourth of the city average.

Female literacy is lower than the male literacy as has been observed in city average as well.

The head count reveals that approximately three-quarter of the shelterless are illiterate.

There are 208 elderly women compared to 1062 elderly men.

Girls form more than 27 percent of total children below 14 years.

There are only 58 children educated at primary level and 10 at secondary level in a total of 2777 children aged between 6 to 14 years.

In the secondary level, there are only 7 boys and 3 girls in a total of 1480 children aged between 11 to 14 years.

There are 146 adult male against only 25 adult female who read at secondary level in a total of 43502 adults.

Only 9 men are educated up to graduation level whereas there is not a single lady graduate among the shelterless..

There are 2929 shelterless children, aged between 5 to 14 years, engaged in several occupations, majority of them being associated with construction work.

More children are engaged in beggary than in rag picking, close to 3 per cent are employed as domestic help.

Unemployed rate is much lower in case of girls compared to the boys, indicating the plight of girl child.

Majority of them (nearly 63 per cent) has a monthly income ranging from Rs. 2000 to 3000.

The shelterless in Delhi earns between Rs. 70 and Rs. 100 per day on average.

On the average, men are able to send home around Rs. 12,000 annually. The women save almost half of that amount as they also earn less.

Among 1997 persons surveyed, there are 110 persons with families in Delhi, 1534 persons with families in native places and 353 persons with no family.

About one-third of them do not have any kind of documents to establish their identity, either in Delhi or in their native places.

The most common document they possess is the voter ID in their native places. There is 35 per cent of the total shelterless who have these IDs.

Primary reason of the shelterless for going home is to repay loans (74.5%).

Majority of them (61.26%) keep their things with themselves.

Majority of the shelterless use firewood as the main cooking fuel as it is the cheapest.

Maximum duration of stay as shelterless is observed between 5 to 10 years.

It is observed that close to 80 percent of them do not change their sleeping place, either in the open or in the night shelters, provided they are allowed to do so.

iii

Only a little more than one third of the persons surveyed knew about the existence of night shelters.

Even among those who knew about this scheme, nearly 70 per cent of them decided not to sleep in such shelters.

Majority of the shelterless, who do not sleep in these shelters, consider the night shelters to be unsafe for sleeping.

The shelterless women remain outside the Stree Shakti Camps organized by the state governments. They do not quality as beneficiaries.

Majority of the shelter less do not consult doctors in the city for their illness.

It is only 2 persons among 1997 surveyed who have taken advantage of pulse polio treatments though the headcount survey shows that the there are more than 300 infants among the shelter less.

They suffer more from accidents than common diseases like cold/flu or diarrhea.

Government hospitals are the most common place where the shelterless go for treatment.

More than 36 per cent of men and more than 46 per cent of women still use open fields for defecation.

Community tap is the most significant source of dirking water for the shelterless in Delhi.

Eviction threat and police harassment are two major risks for the shelterless.

The estimated number of shelterless person by 2016 is 141,091 according to IHD survey and 34,166 according to calculated Census Growth Rate of shelterless person.

SHELTERLESS PERSONS IN DELHI

CHALLENGING INCLUSIVE GROWTH POLICIES

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

Houselessness is a historical phenomenon spread all over the world. In the United

States, houselessness and the risk of being landless are on the rise. Los Angeles, the

capital of fantasies, also shows the highest concentration of homeless in the USA. In

Canada, houselessness is recognized as national disaster. In Toronto, one of Canada’s

richest cities, thousands of people have been left without access to basic human needs.

Japan has experienced increasing houselessness since 1992, when the recession

began. In Japan, the term houseless refers to persons sleeping in open spaces only

without including those living in night shelters. This figure was 27,000 in 2005. In

Indonesia, the pavement dwellers and squatters are the poorest of the poor of the urban

population. But they are generally not eligible for various poor-centric government

programmes as they are considered illegal settlers.

The problems of the shelterless have not found much favour with the urban researchers

in India, even though research on urbanization and urban issues occupies an important

place in the social science literature of the country. There has been an explosion of

literature on urbanization and urban issues, some major ones relating to urbanization

trends and processes, urban labour market, slums and urban poverty, land, shelter and

local governance. Surprisingly, studies related to urban poverty or shelters have

overlooked the plight of shelterless persons, possibly because they form less than one

per cent of total population according to census estimates. Slums and squatter

settlements have mushroomed in most large cities, catering anywhere between 15 to

35 per cent of the total urban population. Majority of slum related studies were designed

to investigate the demographic, economic and social conditions of the slum dwellers.

Studies related to urban poverty have found in general that while the incidence of urban

poverty has registered a decline in recent years, deprivation as shown by the proportion

of persons without productive employment, shelter and services has increased

substantially.

Urbanisation of poverty is a universally acknowledged phenomenon. Rural poverty

strategies have not been able to restrict this exodus of rural poor to urban areas largely

because of the inevitability of urban dynamics, prominently surfacing across the entire

developing world. It has created two distinct dimensions in the cities; (a) deprived of a

proper urban habitat, the poor have had to find residential foot hold in slums, and (b) in

their search for employment and enterprise, they have been forced to find survival in the

informal sector. Increase in urbanization of poverty has led to increase in size of informal

sector. People who could not even find accommodation in slums have formed the

shelterless group – the most vulnerable among urban poor.

1.1 Characteristics of Shelterlessness

The disaster of houselessness may be broadly explained by two sets of factors:

(1) Social factors – Violence at home, behavioral problem, living away from home,

anxiety and obsessions, alcohol, drugs, crime, depression, lack of education,

eviction and poverty are some of the major reasons citied as explanation for

homelessness.

(2) Natural factors: Earthquake, floods, lack of rain, and other natural disasters

like Tsunami make thousands of persons shelterless.

The phenomenon of homelessness is not monolithic. The manifestation of

houselessness varies not only globally but also nationally due to interest diversity of its

causes and consequences. Simultaneously, the houseless also shares similarity on

issues of social exclusion, life experience and felt needs despite their differentiation in

terms of age, sex and social unit. Homogeneous representation, through uniform

definitions as adopted in the census of different counties, may make intersections less

effective in developing countries where the extent of homelessness is great and varied

but resources are scarce. It is important to understand this dichotomy of diversity-

similarly component before preparing any policy framework. Access of the poor to home

– a social- spatial realm – is a pre-condition for benefiting from human development

practice that aims to improve upon people’s ability to earn, learn and live healthy.

The concept of home generally is an ideological construct besides being a concrete

setting or daily household production and reproduction. A given home is imbued with

social and cultural values, operates under specific gender relations and guides familial

and kinship patterns among its dwellers. These are more relevant in rural setting but

applicable in urban towns and metro cities over a period of time. Hence, living without a

roof over head does not capture homelessness in broader sense. From a social

perspective, people can be homeless even when living in a legitimate shelter from

reasons beyond their control. Loss of identity instead of only shelter contributes to a

given individual or group perception of homelessness, i.e. abandoned children, trafficked

women etc. Home is also imbued with economic implications besides its commodity

potential (own, sell or rent). A given home provides a setting for income generation and

various subsistence activities essential for the day to day survival of its dwellers. Thus

existence without a home has serious physical, social and economic consequences that

can be summerised as rooflessness, rootlessness and resourcelessness. Relative

extent and consequence of their severity vary from person to person. The major causes

that lead to these consequences are mainly poverty, natural disasters and forced

eviction. Homeless population is not homogeneous in terms of physical, social and

economic consequences. The nature of residential circumstances differentiates

homeless people; the consequences of sleeping situations at night of homeless people

differ in terms of age (i.e. adults and children), gender and social units (individual and

houseless). Three types homelessness may be observed depending on residential

circumstances and consequences;

(1) Floating homelessness – It is the most visible type that is based on the physical

criterion of rooflessness, referring to the situation where people live in streets or

other public places without a permanent shelter of their own. They are often

called pavement dwellers or destitute or shelterless or houseless, the common

characteristics being their floating status for day to day survival.

(2) Situated homelessness – From a physical perspective, residential circumstances

of this type are situated at a particular space and under a given shelter.

Squatters living illegally on public land have been the major contributors to this

type of homelessness. The shelter they live in, does not conform to the notion of

adequate shelter despite their owing or renting a shelter in illegal land. From a

social perspective, absence of an identity as a participating member in all

spheres of society constitute the basis of homelessness for groups like

abandoned children and orphans, housemaids and child servants, trafficked

women and children etc.

(3) Potential homelessness – Individuals or houseless at risk of becoming homeless

include people living in slums, especially those who are in shared

accommodation (stranded refugees living in camps), single female workers

(house maids staying at employer’s place), children working in roadside eateries

etc. People who are below or just above poverty line are also potential homeless

due to their vulnerability to eviction, loss of jobs without notice and other social

and natural causes.

The census definitions of homeless person in all countries are based on physical

attributes only – the most visible floating homeless ness i.e. without a roof over head. In

India, people are eligible for support under housing programs if they do not have a roof

or land. However, if a household has a plot in a regularised area, but only a shack upon

it, it is not regarded as homeless because of the land holding.

The fundamental problem of development may be expressed through the missing link

between planning and practice – that might actually be exacerbating houselessness

rather than addressing it. There are often mismatch between the needs and

expectations of the residents of informal settlements, and the solutions that government,

development agencies and planners propose for them. The common buzzwords like

consultation, participation and community involvement generally remain out of context as

decisions are taken without actual involvement of the affected communities with diverse

problems of homelessness.

1.2 Shelterless in India

The Census of India defines the shelterless as houseless, who does not have a roof

over his head. A glimpse at last five censuses reveals that rural houseless households

have declined steadily in number while in urban areas; the situation has almost

remained the same (Table 1.1). However, houseless population has increased in both

rural and urban areas, the increase being sharper in the later. This indicates the

possibility of increase in the number of single houseless persons. In urban areas,

persons come in search of employment leaving their family behind. Houseless persons

in rural area not always signify deprivation as a significant proportion of them have left

house for various socio-cultural reasons. There are some people of moving profession

(Banjara etc.) who do not live in permanent place by choice. In contrast, urban

houselessness is largely an indicator of deprivation. People migrate to urban areas in

search of job and cannot find residence within their affordability.

Table 1.1: Houseless Households and Houseless Popu lation in India

(In lakh)

Year Houseless Households Houseless Population

Total Rural Urban Total Rural Urban

1961 12.65 9.70 1.95

1971 5.65 3.88 1.77 19.86 15.20 4.66

1981 6.16 4.13 2.03 23.43 17.24 6.19

1991 5.22 3.05 2.17 20.07 12.82 7.25

2001 4.48 2.60 1.88 19.44 11.65 7.89

Source: Census of India, various years.

Tenth plan document reveals that, whereas 56.4 per cent of rural and 49 per cent of

urban population were poor in 1973-74, in 1999-00, these came down to 27.1 and 23.6

per cent respectively. The rural poor population, however, dropped from 261.3 million to

193.2 million during this period while the number of urban poor rose from 60 million to 67

million, despite being lower in percentage term. This highlights the rapid rise in the

migration of the rural poor to urban locations. More over, the institutional and legal

framework in urban areas create serious bottleneck in the poor’s search for shelter and

employment. The rural poor is an integral part of the village while it is difficult for the

urban poor to find a legitimate place in the city, thereby making the nature of deprivation

more complex. Needless to add that the shelterless bears the most severe brunt of this

situation.

1.3 Definition and Number of Shelterless Persons

There is significant ambiguity regarding the size of shelterless persons in the national

capital. The Census of India uses the notion of houseless population for persons who

are not living in census houses and are located and enumerated from places such as the

roadside pavements, in Hume pipes, under staircases, or in the open platforms, religious

places etc. The international definition for homeless households mentioned in UN Global

Shelter Strategy, 1988, refers to “households without a shelter that would fall within the

scope of living quarters. They carry their few possessions with them while sleeping in the

streets, in doorways or parks, or in any other space on a more or less random basis”. In

short, a homeless person carries implications of belonging nowhere rather than simply

having nowhere to sleep.

Delhi presents a unique contradiction in living standard. Census of India, Delhi (2001)

reports 33.8 lakh houses and 25.5 lakh households covering a population of 137.8 lakh.

It shows number of total houses exceeds the number of households by 8.3 lakh units.

Further break-up shows 30 lakh occupied houses and 3.8 lakh vacant houses. On the

other hand, the number of houseless population in urban Delhi increased from 18,838 in

1991 to 23,903 in 2001, a decadal increase of 26.89 per cent, i.e. an annual increase of

2.68 per cent.

Delhi Human Development Report (2006) on the other hand, observes, “Although data

on households without shelter are sparse and scattered, estimates suggest that between

50,000 to 70,000 are homeless”. Some unofficial estimates carry this figure to nearly

100,000. The houseless population of Delhi consists of rickshaw pullers, cart pullers, rag

pickers, shoe shine boys, cycle repair persons, coolies, construction labourers, and the

like, majority of them being workers in the informal sector. Some of them sleep in their

work places. They are not counted as houseless persons as they have roofs over their

head though they do not have houses. Besides, there are persons who share the shelter

space with others, as they cannot afford a shelter of their own. There are others who live

under the threat of eviction on expiration of the lease, with no prospects for alternative

housing. They are at the risk of being houseless and form part of concealed houseless

ness, which is very difficult to enumerate. These difficulties lead to under estimation

regarding number of shelter less persons and the depth of their deprivation in the

capital.

People living in substandard houses may also be included in houseless category. The

census divides the conditions of dwelling units in two categories; one based on

perception and the other on the quality of material used. According to the first, the

housing stock is categorised as good, livable and dilapidated. The second classification

is permanent, semi-permanent and temporary. In Delhi, 58 per cent of the households

live in good houses and 5 per cent of them live in dilapidated houses. As per the quality

of material used, 92 per cent of houses are made of permanent materials while 3.5 per

cent of them use temporary material. People use such material in order to escape the

conditions of houselessness. Households with insecure income are likely to live in such

housing units. They are not counted as houseless but have all the possibilities of being

potential homeless.

An important characteristic of homelessness is that it is typically a temporary

circumstance, not a permanent condition, which is why it has neither a clear or

consistent definition, nor a precise method of measurement. Typically, houselessness

applies to a person without a roof. Even in the most developed countries, governments

only systematically collect statistics on these homeless persons who have applied to

local authorities for help, usually families with children and others deemed to be

especially vulnerable. These statistics often do not include overall figures on the number

of single homeless persons.

A more appropriate measure, therefore, is the number of persons who experience

houselessness over a period of time, indicating symptom of long-run deprivation.

Studies on urban poverty in India have thrown light on collective and multi dimensional

characteristics of urban poor, bearing strong similarity with other developing countries.

These studies show that the urban poor do not necessarily live in slums and squatters;

they are not all migrants; they are not all unemployed and they do not all work in the

informal sector. However, rarely these studies have focused on the shelterless in urban

areas, forming the poorest of the urban poor in terms of deprivation.

1.4 Census Coverage of Houseless Persons in Delhi

Houseless population, though significant in absolute number, covers less than one per

cent of total population both at the national and state level (Table 1.2). Rural houseless

is much less in proportion than urban houseless indicating that the problem of

houselessness is generally an urban phenomenon. The number of houseless persons in

urban Delhi is much more than the rural figure as Delhi is largely urban. The reverse is

true in distribution of houseless population for India. Delhi accounts for 1.28 per cent of

total houseless population in India while its share in total population is 1.34 per cent. In

absolute terms, houseless population in the country is equivalent to one class I city

while, in Delhi, it is the size of one class III town.

Table 1.2: Houseless Population – 2001 Comparative Scenario Rural Urban Total India Houseless Population 1,165,167

(0.15%) 778,599 (0.27%)

1,943,766 (0.18%)

Total Population 742490639 (100%)

286119689 (100%)

1,028,610,328 (100%)

Delhi Houseless Population 1,063

(0.11%) 23,903

(0.19%) 24,966 (0.18)

Total Population 944727 (100%)

12,905,780 (100%)

13850507 (100%)

Source: Primary Census Abstract, Census of India, 2001 Table A-5 Houseless population declined in number from 1981 to 1991 but increased again during

2001 in Delhi (Table 1.3). However, it is showing continuous proportionate decline in

relation to total population. This can be explained to some extent by the slowly declining

migration rate. Migrations from the prosperous neighbours like Punjab and Haryana

have declined considerably to bring down the proportion to less than one percent. The

newly developed areas in the National Capital Region have also contributed to decline of

migration from these states. On the other hand, recent policies of industrial relocation

and eviction have contributed to the rise of number of the shelterless in absolute terms in

recent years. Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has slowed down its activities of

resettlement while continuing the squatter removal programs following the Supreme

Court order. This has resulted in the increase in the number of the shelterless.

Table 1.3: Houseless Population in Urban Delhi (198 1-2001)

Category 1981 1991 2001 Houseless Population 22516 18838 23903 Total Population 6048149 9152833 12819761 Houseless population as a % of total population 0.37 0.21 0.19 Source: Primary Census Abstracts of Delhi: 1981, 1991, 2001

1.5 Concern for Shelterless in Delhi Master Plan - 2021

Probably it is because of the insignificant proportion of shelterless in total population that

the city planners and managers have not paid any attention to them for a long time. It did

not find adequate mention in the Master Plan for Delhi (MPD) that has entered in its third

phase. The latest Master Plan, i.e., MPD-2021 expresses concerns regarding access to

residential and commercial lands to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) and Lower

Income Groups (LIG) as well as small and micro enterprises both in the formal and

informal sector. It recognizes that the informal sector is the major source of employment

in the economic fabric of the city. It has proposed to earmark ‘hawking’ and ‘no hawking’

zones at neighborhood and cluster level. It provides guidelines for identifying areas of

informal trade like weekly markets spread all over Delhi and providing necessary

facilities to them. It also proposes to institutionalize design of stalls, push carts and

mobile vans. All these are welcome steps to handle the locational problems of informal

workers, accommodating majority of the shelterless persons. However, it talks little of

earmarking space for their accommodation. It is the pace and nature of implementation

that has blocked the efforts of earlier Master Plans towards better land use. The latest

Master Plan has taken a deeper look into the problems of the deprived sector, but spatial

approach need to be matched with economic incentives for successful implementation.

The shelterless, need not only a place to stay but minimum living facilities as well.

Their number is quite significant in magnitude as well as regarding duration of stay.

Many of them do not see any change in their status for last 20-25 years. They have

come to city primarily in search of jobs but continue to stay as shelterless while sending

the remittance back to the native place in order to build a secure future there. They

cannot afford a shelter of their own in the city with their meager savings. They do not

have any worthwhile assets, required to submit as proof of belonging. Consequently,

they are unable to make any claim on tangible city assets and remain floating in nature

though they share the same footpath year after year, with perpetual threat of being

driven away from their sleeping place from time to time. Their existence is characterized

by this foot loose nature, thereby making their problems more complicated.

The new Master Plan recognizes the need for providing more night shelters. These are

proposed to be provided in crowded public places like the railway terminals, bus

terminals, wholesale markets etc., many of them being also major work centers for the

shelterless. Special provisions should be made for the more vulnerable section like

women and children including the disabled, orphans and the aged.

In addition, multi -purpose use of the existing facility buildings are proposed to be

allowed for night shelter purpose. Provision should also be made for connecting existing

building, wherever available, with suitable modifications into night shelters. It proposes to

earmark at least 25 sites for night shelters on the basis of 2001 census of houseless

population. In order to make the provision of this facility financially sustainable for the

local body, the MPD-2021 suggests exploring innovative concepts like integrated

complex with commercial space on the ground floor and night shelters on the first floor,

towards developing self-sustaining night shelters. The norm to be followed is one night

shelter for 1 lakh population on the basis of the existing ratio between the houseless and

total population, (1:0.19) in urban areas.

1.6 Need for the Survey

The definitions, size and composition of the shelterless in the capital is significantly

heterogeneous. It is difficult to get a clear picture of the volume and nature of the

problem and to estimate the extent of deprivation. Field studies generally refer to some

specific areas and focus on specific groups. The Census carries on head count survey

once in ten years. The number of shelterless is counted on a single night thereby failing

to capture the volume in its entirety. There are some unpublished city specific reports,

focusing on certain areas of vulnerability of the shelterless, i.e. the survey by the Delhi

Development Authority (DDA) on children in night shelters (1985). Aashray Adhilkar

Abhiyan (AAA) has carried a rapid assessment survey in 2000, with a headcount spread

over the whole Delhi in ten days and interview with 690 persons. It gave detailed

accounts of the existing night shelters and provided important insights regarding

occupations, socio-economic background and living environment of the shelterless. The

study counted close to 53000 shelterless persons in the capital and made an

assumption that for each person counted, there is one missing and concluded that the

number of shelterless persons is close to 1, 00,000.

In this background, it was felt that a more rigorous survey is required to be able to

estimate the size of shelterless persons, to take a deeper look into their activities and to

make projections for next 5 to 10 years in order to evolve an inclusive policy framework

to tackle with the problem. Such a study is imperative to understand the intricacies of the

urbanization process in an ever-expanding city.

1.7 Objective

The objectives of the proposed survey are spelt out as follows:

• To specify, to the best of ability, the number of homeless persons through

headcount.

• To analyse their socio-economic background in terms of original residence,

earning, education, nature of job, number of family members, duration of stay as

homeless etc.

• To look into nature and causes of homelessness

• To describe their awareness level of shelter options and the willingness to

accept such options

• To project homelessness for a period of 5-10 years.

1.8 Methodology

The survey has been conducted in two stages (a) total head count spread over all the

nine districts of Delhi and (b) a sample survey of 2000 persons based on more detailed

questionnaire.

(A) Head count survey

In the head count survey, following steps have been taken:

1. Identifying the areas in each district where the homeless population sleep. It

required assistance from local NGOs, RWAs, District administration and the

police. As the survey was conducted at night, the security concern was very

important. The Joint Commissioners of Police issued letters to the area police

stations under their respective jurisdictions directing them to provide the help

required.

2. District maps were collected from the district administrators locating the areas of

concentration of houseless persons.

3. IHD provided two – day training to the field investigators regarding the nature of

jobs and familiarity with the local people before the survey.

4. We established networking with the concerned agencies to map out the areas

where the homeless persons sleep in various parts of the city and to ascertain

the timings of their availability.

5. The headcount survey was conducted every night between February 12 and

March 14 with the help of 15 investigators during 8.30 pm and 1.30 am.

Shelterless persons are largely day time workers. They come back to have their

food at night and settle down by 9.00 p.m. Some of them have odd working

hours. The fellow settlers provided information regarding them. It was not

advisable to stay beyond 1.30 am as all the necessary information could be

collected by then.

6. The census data for last three decades have shown that the number of

houseless population in urban areas has slowly increased in the country while it

fluctuated in Delhi. Our headcount has shown that houseless population has

been more than double the census estimate. We have calculated annual growth

rates on the basis of these estimates. Sample survey has provided the data

related to duration of stay as houseless. This has helped in forming a growth

pattern of the shelterless. Projections for shelterless persons for the next 5 to 10

years have been made based on this trend.

Three procedures were adopted in this survey.

(a) Questionnaire

Two types of questionnaire were prepared for two stage survey.

(i) Data Sheet – this was prepared for every shelterless person to generate

database on the areas where they stay, age –sex composition, religious affinity,

marital and education status, occupation, state of origin, reasons for leaving

home, duration of stay and change of sleeping place in a year.

(ii) A more detailed three page questionnaire was prepared for sample survey of

2000 persons. This has provided database for their personal information, socio-

economic status, family status, migration status, identification documents,

frequency of visiting native place, income earned and remittance sent back,

health benefits, sanitation aspects and assistance received.

(b) Focussed Group Discussion (FGD)

This was held with the NGOs working with the shelterless, those shelterless who were

not included in detailed survey and other persons who lived in these areas, shared more

or less the same occupations, but they themselves were not shelterless. It was held in

every district. This helped in cross-checking the data and generating multi-dimensional

insights into their problems. People staying in night shelters were also included in

FGDs in order to generate wider perceptions. Discussions generally centred round the

following themes- why people are shelterless, how do they manage their livelihood, what

are there perceptions regarding future and what are the inadequacies in assistance

provided to them.

(c) Interview

Detailed personal interviews were held with the Joint

Commissioners , Deputy Commissioners of Police in each district as well as the civilian

administrators, i.e. the District Commissioners. Station House Officers (SHO) and the

Beat constables were also interviewed in the areas with high concentration of shelterless

persons. Police comes into direct contact with them every night and the shelterless often

complains of harassment. It was necessary to hear both the groups in order to

understand the problems in depth.

(b) Sample Survey

The sample survey consisted of a detailed formulation of questionnaire commensurate

with the objectives of the survey. A very simple questionnaire was prepared keeping in

mind the potential respondents and their language. The objective was to collect

information regarding income, language spoken, occupation, willingness to go to a night

shelter, type of problem faced and assistance expected etc.

Choice of Sample Size

The number 2000 was chosen arbitrarily in order to generate a critical mass that was

possible to cover within the short time provided. This was distributed over all the nine

districts proportionately to the concentration of shelterless in each district.

Coverage

We tried to follow the essence of census definition of a homeless person with a little

modification: -a person without any private roof over his or her head. Sometimes, the

shelterless tries to cover some area with materials like plastic and other non-permanent

stuff. There are people who sleep in the public structures like the railway stations,

market buildings, in the courtyard of private houses etc. They have been counted as

shelterless. We have not included the construction workers who are tied with specific

contractors. They also live in plastic-like non-permanent structures but they move on

with the contractors. However, the labourers among the shelterless, not tied to specific

contractors have been covered. These labourers line up daily for jobs in particular places

that may be called the human market. We have not included the persons staying in the

permanent night shelters though the persons staying in the temporary night shelters

have been included. The former category has been included in the FGD in order to learn

more about them. Domestic helps staying in the employers’ places have not been

included though they may be classified as potential shelterless.

Survey Period

The head count survey was completed in one month. The FGDs were over in 10 days. A

5-day pilot survey was conducted prelude to the main survey in order to be familiar with

the process. Sample survey was carried on within the same month involving different

groups of investigators. The whole study was over within six months.

1.9 Limitations of the Survey

The survey tried to count the number of the shelterless spread all over Delhi. We chose

the period between mid-February and mid-March for primary survey. This period

chosen reflected the end of winter. The climate was also helpful as it is the absolutely

shelterless who will sleep in the open during this time. During summer, people like to

sleep outside their residence with the possibilities of overestimating the number of the

shelterless.

However, our estimates may not escape the possibility of underestimation as some

persons do visit their native places anytime during the year. We tried to minimize the

error by asking such questions about them who left to the fellow pavement dwellers, the

police and the NGOs concerned. There are many lanes and by-lanes where lone

shelterless may be sleeping who have escaped our attention. Finally, some persons

sleep on the rooftop of the factories or inside the shops in which they are working. They

may bring other aquantaints also. We have not counted them. We have also excluded

the inmates of the functional permanent night shelters. The survey figures, therefore,

may be underestimated to the extent of 10 to 15 per cent on these counts. We have not

estimated the potential shelterless also, whose number would be indicative of the full

magnitude of the shelterless. We tried to minimize the limitations of censes estimates by

increasing the counting period from one day to one month in order to capture as

many of them as possible.

The report is structured in the following way:

1. Chapter I provides the introductory background of the study.

2. Chapter II summarizes the major findings from the headcount survey highlighting

their locational concentration, migration aspect, socio-cultural profile, age

distribution, level of education and occupational pattern.

3. Chapter III focuses on women, children and the elderly; the most vulnerable

components among the shelterless.

4. We have undertaken more in-depth survey of 1997 persons in order to

understand their livelihood, health and sanitation practices, supports to family,

their monthly income, expenditure, major risks in living a life of shelterless and

future perspectives. These findings are summarized in chapter IV.

5. We have excluded persons living in the permanent might shelters from an

headcount survey. However, persons living in temporary night shelters are

included. We have conducted FGDs with the persons living in permanent night

shelters in order to understand their problems and priorities. The scheme of Night

Shelters is the only welfare programme available to the shelterless as they do not

possess the necessary documents to be eligible for other programmes meant for

the poor. Chapter V describes the results of such analysis.

6. Conclusions and recommendations are summarized in chapter VI.

Chapter II

PROFILE OF THE SHELTERLESS

Shelterless persons are scattered all over Delhi in different numbers. They have no

stable address by definition, do not generally appear on any voting list and they do

not want to maintain any contact with representatives of the state for fear of negative

impact as they are generally rendered illegal by law. They concentrate mainly on the

public places like temples, from where they are not thrown out, or in the railway

stations, rooftops of their work places, markets and so on. These places are,

however, too inadequate compared to their numbers. Hence, open streets and foot

paths are their last resorts to sleep for a few hours.

The head count survey reveals that there are a tota l of 46788 shelterless

persons in Delhi, with 39465 (84.35 per cent) men and 7323 (15.65 per cent)

women (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1: District wise Distribution of Shelter less Persons in Delhi

District Male Female Total

N % N % N % Central 4528 11.47 897 12.25 5425 11.59 East 2955 7.49 826 11.28 3781 8.08 New Delhi 1317 3.34 330 4.51 1647 3.52 North 6145 15.57 1160 15.84 7305 15.61 North East 3623 9.18 784 10.71 4407 9.42 North West 7318 18.54 1117 15.25 8435 18.03 South 7290 18.47 1335 18.23 8625 18.43 South West 1854 4.70 238 3.25 2092 4.47 West 4435 11.24 636 8.68 5071 10.84 Total 39465 84.35 7323 15.65 46788 100.00

Figure 1: Male -Female Distribution (%)-Districtwise

8378 80 84 82 87 85 89 87 84

17 16 18 13 15 11 13 1622 20

0102030405060708090

100

Centra

lEas

t

New D

elhi

North

North

Eas

t

North

Wes

t

South

South

Wes

tW

est

Total

Male

Female

2.1 Locational Concentration

Maximum concentration of these persons is observed in South district (8625), followed

by North-West (8435). New Delhi district shows the minimum number of shelterless

persons as they are generally not allowed to sleep in the open. This district

accommodates the government and foreign residents with the offices and the residential

areas. The reserved area for diplomatic affairs, the vast open spaces and spacious

bunglows of political, administrative and social heavyweights represent the face of

national capital with little trace of the shelter less. They concentrate on the religious

places like Gurdwara Bangla Sahib, Hanuman Mandir or the market places like the

Connaught Place, Gole Market etc. that provide enough open space to sleep as well as

to work. There are several religious and market places in South district also to provide

enough public places for the shelterless to sleep. The North West district shows the

second most concentration of shelterless persons. It has the biggest wholesale market in

India, the Azadpur Mandi that offers manual job of loader to the poor migrants. These

two districts together account for more than one third of total shelter less in the capital.

North, West and Central districts account for another one third of total shelterless in

Delhi. Central district is large trading area while industries are concentrated in North and

West districts besides North- West. North district accommodates Delhi University and

other institutes that offer occupations to domestic maids, rag pickers etc. besides the

usual labourers and transporters like rickshaw pullers. The rest one-third of the total

shelterless is distributed among the other four districts (Table 2.1). Figure 1 shows male-

dominated shelteless in all districts. It is quite natural as the shelterless generally leave

their family behind.

A comparison with the census figures shows interesting locational deviation apart from

increase in absolute numbers. IHD survey shows the number of shelterless persons as

almost double the census estimates. This difference indicates possible under-estimation

related to census methodology as explained earlier. The table shows significant change

in locational distribution of the shelterless. Census figurers show maximum

concentration of shelterless persons in two districts i.e., North and Central whereas IHD

survey shows the concentration has shifted to South and North –West. In general,

however, it shows more even distribution of poverty. The shelterless has increased in

number in all the districts except in Central and North, where the numbers almost

remained the same with a little alteration. The comparatively richer South district now

accommodates the highest number of shelterless persons

Will there ever be any roof over our head?

This may partly be explained by the increase in the number of temples in this district

that provides space to them. The increasing construction and entertainment activities in

this district also have attracted job seekers. Industrial relocation in North-West district

may account, to a certain extent, for concentration of more shelterless here. However, it

is a cause of concern that increasing prosperity of Delhi has been associated with more

uniform distribution of poverty. Even in New Delhi, where the shelterless is strictly not

allowed in many areas, their number has more than doubled (Table 2.2).

2.2 Migration

The national capital draws people from all over India, in all income groups. The

economically better- off come to Delhi with better job offer and gradually settle down in

the city. Economically poorer, to a large extent, tries to keep strong linkage with native

place, builds assets there with the hope to go back when he is not capable to work any

more. The shelterless shows this tendency very strongly and cherishes the desire to go

back among his own people one day, though many of them can not fulfill this dream and

end up being permanent pavement dwellers. Uttar Pradesh sends the maximum number

of shelterless persons in Delhi, followed by Bihar. These two states, taken together,

account for about 69 per cent of total shelterless. Madhya Pradesh sends a little over

10 per cent of shelterless migrants to Delhi while Rajasthan’s share is almost 7 per cent.

It should be remembered that we have not included the construction workers brought

regularly by contractors under specific contracts.

Table 2.2: District wise Distribution of Houseless Population in urban Delhi- Census and IHD Survey

Census (2001) IHD Survey (2007) Districts Total

Population (No.)

Houseless Population

(No.)

Houseless Population

(No.)

Percentage

North West 2595506 (20.11) 2536 (10.60) 8435 18.03 North 734940 (5.69) 7059 (29.53) 7305 15.61 North East 1626514 (12.60) 903 (3.77) 4407 9.42 East 1445360 (11.19) 835 (3.49) 3781 8.08 New Delhi 179112 (1.38 709 (2.96) 1647 3.52 Central 646385 (5.01) 5676 (23.74) 5425 11.59 West 2042114 (14.82) 1985 (8.30) 5071 10.84 South West 1529587 (11.85) 1524 (6.37) 2092 4.47 South 2106262 (16.32) 2676 (11.19) 8625 18.43 Urban Delhi 12905780 (100) 23903 (100) 46788 100

Source : Primary Census Abstract of Delhi, 2001 and IHD Primary Headcount Survey, 2007

Note: Figures in bracket show percentage to respective column total.

A significant proportion of such construction workers come to the capital from Rajasthan.

In the present study, migration from Rajasthan shows lower percentage as these

laborers are excluded. The shelterless migrants from West Bengal show a little lower

percentage than Rajasthan. Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and West Bengal account for

nearly 24 per cent of the total migrants. Share of other states excluding the five

mentioned above, is less than 8 per cent. It is quite possible that migrants from

Bangladesh are also included in West Bengal state because of same language. The

name of areas like Dhaka Colony in North West district suggests their presence but

cannot be conclusively said as they possess no legal papers.

Comparatively richer states send very little poor migrants to Delhi. The states of Gujarat,

Maharastra, Punjab and Haryana together account for 1.45 percent of total shelterless

migrants. The three newly formed states together also send less than one per cent

migrants even though their three bigger neighbours together have huge contribution to

the flow of poor migrants (Figure 2). Shelterless migrants are spread all over Delhi, with

major concentration being observed in South, North West, Central and West districts,

each accounting for more than 16 per cent of total migrants. Interestingly, residents of

Delhi account for only 1.51 per cent of total shelterless, indicating the strong possibility

of long term residents to come out of poverty line and homelessness (Annexure I).

Figure 2: Migration (%) from Major States

30.92

10.19

7.07

37.49

6.228.11

Blhar MP Rajasthan UP WB Others

2.2a Reasons for Migration

The migrant shelterless almost uniformly cite the single most reason for migration as job

prospects near their native place. Delhi offers maximum employment opportunity in

variety of jobs that are not available else where. It is primarily the pull factor of the

national capital that attracts people to this unknown city leaving their families behind.

Some of the shelterless have left their native land in the expectation of getting better

pays. Even if the jobs are available in their states, they will not be as rewarding in terms

of income. They are prepared to compromise on living environment in order to earn

more. Many of the shelterless have decided to come to Delhi as they know some body

here. Some persons from their community have come here to try their luck and gradually

they have brought other members. Living among the same community brings some

sense of social security. This is reflected in the names of some of the localities, i.e.

Harijan Basti, Dhaka Colony, Rajasthani Camp, Madrasi Camp etc. The residents of

these communities are not all shelterless. The shelterless tries to find a sleeping place

in these colonies with a sense of bondage and security in otherwise unknown place and

unknown working environment. This also helps the migrants in keeping their

belongings and money to the persons known to them and creates the base for informal

savings (Table 2.3).

Table 2.3 : District wise Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Reasons of Migration

District Reason Better Job Better Pay Near to

Residence Knew

Somebody Others Total

N % N % N % N % N % N % Central 45 6.91 568 13.15 4373 11.51 437 11.51 2 9.09 5425 11.59 East 114 17.51 360 8.33 2935 7.72 370 9.74 2 9.09 3781 8.08 New Delhi 27 4.15 198 4.58 1258 3.31 164 4.32 0 0.00 1647 3.52 North 101 15.51 676 15.65 5992 15.77 532 14.01 4 18.18 7305 15.61 North East 109 16.74 296 6.85 3582 9.43 419 11.04 1 4.55 4407 9.42 North West 107 16.44 701 16.23 6897 18.15 724 19.07 6 27.27 8435 18.03 South 70 10.75 834 19.31 7187 18.91 528 13.91 6 27.27 8625 18.43 South West 25 3.84 277 6.41 1574 4.14 216 5.69 0 0.00 2092 4.47 West 53 8.14 410 9.49 4200 11.05 407 10.72 1 4.55 5071 10.84

Total 651 1.39 4320 9.23 37998 81.21 3797 8.12 22 0.05 46788 100

People coming in search for better job have spread all over Delhi. Majority of them have

made it on their own and here they have found their own community. Proportion of

persons coming here for better pay is close to 10 per cent. New Delhi, North, North West

and North East districts accommodate such persons, while people who come with some

body staying here already, are largely concentrated in the North West and South

districts. This familiarity is spread in all kinds of occupations. However, the strongest pull

factor remains finding job near to residence, that attracts mostly persons from UP and

Bihar.

2.3 Socio-Cultural Profile

The shelterless in the capital come from different socio- cultural background with

heterogeneous characteristics. It is astonishing to learn the variety of livelihoods they

adopt in their struggle for survival. However, poverty and rootlessness in the city remain

two most common elements reflecting their conditions.

2.3a Caste Profile

The central government publishes the list of Other Backward Castes (OBC) for the

states. The head count survey of the shelterless shows that OBCs have maximum

share (about 45 per cent) of total shelterless in Delhi, share of the Scheduled Castes

(SC) being second (34.05). STs form nearly 10 percent of the total. OBCs and SCs

together form approximately 78 per cent of total shelterless indicating the extent of

deprivation among lower castes (Figure 3). it shows the hollowness of reserving high

value education and jobs for the deprived without analyzing how many of them can

reach that level.

North West and South districts showing maximum concentration of shelterless also

show maximum percentage of OBCs and SCs (Table 2.4).

Table 2.4: District wise Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Social Group

District OBC SC ST Others Total

N % N % N % N % N % Central 2444 11.76 1867 11.72 494 10.81 620 11.27 5425 11.59East 1438 6.92 1320 8.29 516 11.29 507 9.22 3781 8.08New Delhi 845 4.06 497 3.12 178 3.89 127 2.31 1647 3.52North 3316 15.95 2500 15.69 761 16.65 728 13.24 7305 15.61North East 1696 8.16 1551 9.74 479 10.48 681 12.38 4407 9.42North West 4319 20.77 2706 16.99 583 12.76 827 15.04 8435 18.03South 3633 17.47 2764 17.35 937 20.50 1291 23.48 8625 18.43South West 857 4.12 780 4.90 186 4.07 269 4.89 2092 4.47West 2242 10.78 1944 12.20 436 9.54 449 8.17 5071 10.84Total 20790 44.43 15929 34.05 4570 9.77 5499 11.75 46788 100.00

Figure 3: Distribution of Shelterless Persons by So cial Group

12%

44%

34%

10%

OBC SC ST Others

2.3b Religion

Hindus naturally form the majority of the shelterless (Figure 4) followed by the Muslims.

Christians and Sikhs form less than one per cent of total. North, Central and North-West

districts show concentration of shelterless Sikhs and Christians while maximum Muslim

shelterless is found in the South district. (Table 2.5).

Figure 4: Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Re ligion

0%12%

87%

1%

Hindu Muslim Christian Sikhs

Table 2.5: Districtwise Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Religion

District Hindu Muslim Christian Sikhs Total


Figure 5: Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Ma rital Status0.1517.41

82.36

0.08

Married Unmarried Widow /Widow er Divorced/Separated

2.3c Marital Status

Majority of the shelterless are married and have left their families in the native places.

There are more than 8000 unmarried persons forming a little over 17 per cent. Widow/

widowers form less than one percent of the total (Figure 5). Some of them have also

faced social and legal problems like divorce and separation though their percentage is

least. Aged widows are driven out of families to spend the rest of life as shelterless.

Many of them are forced into beggary as no alternatives are open to them. Welfare

schemes focusing on skill training may help them to come out of such misery. North

West and South districts accommodating the majority of the shelterless also shows all

their social characteristics (Table 2.6).

Table 2.6: Districtwise Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Marital Status

District Married Unmarried Widow/ Widower

Divorced/ Separated

Total

N % N % N % N % N % Central 4539 11.78 874 10.73 5 7.25 7 17.95 5425 11.59 East 2808 7.29 968 11.88 5 7.25 0 0.00 3781 8.08 New Delhi 1302 3.38 330 4.05 0 0.00 15 38.46 1647 3.52 North 6003 15.58 1279 15.70 17 24.64 6 15.38 7305 15.61 North East 3515 9.12 880 10.80 10 14.49 2 5.13 4407 9.42 North West 7062 18.33 1355 16.63 11 15.94 7 17.95 8435 18.03 South 7310 18.97 1294 15.89 19 27.54 2 5.13 8625 18.43 South West 1715 4.45 377 4.63 0 0.00 0 0.00 2092 4.47 West 4280 11.11 789 9.69 2 2.90 0 0.00 5071 10.84 Total 38534 82.36 8146 17.41 69 0.15 39 0.08 46788 100.00

2.4 Age –group Distribution

The shelterless comes to the city primarily in search of job. Hence, naturally, the working

age group will dominate the age profile. The survey shows that the two most vulnerable

groups i.e., the children and the elderly also are forced to spend their lives in the open

under extreme conditions.

There are 375 children below 5 years of age forming less than one per cent of total

shelterless in the capital. They are exposed to all types of disease with very little

resistance power.

The aged population (60 year and above) form almost 3 per cent of total shelterless in

the capital. They are in need of special medical care besides other necessities. Many of

them have spent almost whole of their lives in the street.

Persons in the working age group constitute more than 90 per cent of the shelterless,

contributing significantly to the total labour force. Children between 11 and 14 years

(3.16 percent of total shelterless population) also contribute to the labour force as many

of them are employed in the informal sector despite being prevented under law. The

vulnerable groups like small children and the old are however, significant in number

requiring urgent policy interventions. Their relatively small proportion in total population

is explained to a large extent by the fact that the shelterless is generally single male.

However, relatively smaller proportion of children below 5 years compared to those

above 60 may also indicate high child mortality rate. (Figure 6).

Figure 6:Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Age -group

90%

1% 3%3%3%

0-4 5-10 11-14 15-59 60 & Above

East district accounts for maximum number of children below 5 while the persons above

60 are found mostly in the South district. Population in the working age group constitutes

84 to 92 per cent of the total, distributed more or less uniformly in the districts. South

and North districts display maximum concentration of children between 11 to 14 years

indicating the possibility of significant employment of children in these areas. This also

indicate another acute social problem; adolescent girls roaming in the streets and

exposing themselves to sexual harassment. We will take up this issue in the next

chapter. Children below 11 years also work in some occupations like domestic help and

helpers in small stalls. Figures for locational concentration indicate the need for area-

specific policy intervention rather than general welfare schemes spread uniformly all

over the capital (Table 2.7).

Table 2.7: Districtwise Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Age-group

District 0-4 5-10 11-14 15-59 60 & Above Total

N % N % N % N % N % N % Central 27 7.56 179 12.35 144 9.73 4891 11.58 184 14.49 5425 11.59East 89 24.93 226 15.60 172 11.62 3182 7.53 112 8.82 3781 8.08New Delhi 3 0.84 74 5.11 73 4.93 1460 3.46 37 2.91 1647 3.52North 48 13.45 230 15.87 242 16.35 6621 15.68 164 12.91 7305 15.61North East 52 14.57 174 12.01 171 11.55 3857 9.13 153 12.05 4407 9.42North West 57 15.97 174 12.01 167 11.28 7838 18.56 199 15.67 8435 18.03South 47 13.17 230 15.87 271 18.31 7786 18.44 291 22.91 8625 18.43South West 6 1.68 50 3.45 95 6.42 1905 4.51 36 2.83 2092 4.47West 28 7.84 112 7.73 145 9.80 4692 11.11 94 7.40 5071 10.84Total 357 0.76 1449 3.10 1480 3.16 42232 90.26 1270 2.71 46788 100.00

2.5 Occupational Pattern

The shelterless generally works as construction labourer and rickshaw puller. There is

significant number of construction labourers among the women also. However, a large

section of them earn their living as beggars.

The shleterless work seven days a week and 9 to 10 hours a day without any gender

bias. The long working hours reflect the exploitative characteristics of informal economy,

with no formal agreement regarding employment conditions. However, if the labourer

continues to work, be it in a construction site or wayside restaurant or a shop, they are

generally not sacked also. The long working hour is evident in all types of occupations

reflecting unfavourable working conditions. There is hardly any gender discrimination in

exploitation. However in two districts, women report a little longer working hours.

Shelterless workers are generally occupied in one type of employment only. The long

working hours suggest that there is hardly any scope to take up subsidiary employment

activities in order to supplement income. In some occupations like newspaper selling,

children who sell the newspapers in the morning and go to schools in the second shifts

like late afternoons. Similarly, the part time sweepers work for two hours in the morning

and take up other jobs during day or go to schools. Tow shifts in schools have opened

up such opportunities for these children without compromising on family income.

However, the majority of shelterless children as well as adults are engaged in jobs with

long working hours with hardly any possibility of taking other options.

Age-groupwise occupational distribution (Table 2.8) shows that the little children and the

elderly also work in the construction site that gives maximum employment to the

shelterless. Little children (5 to 1o years) take to beggary (9.11%) and work as domestic

workers (3.80%) also. A significant proportion of them are found as self employed, i.e.

mainly the cobblers. Unemployment is maximum in the lowest age group revealing the

terrible truth that as they grow up they will be engulfed by the low paying labour market

without any opportunity of improving their lot. The elderly takes up begging in a

significant way. When they are driven away from the family owing to their aged

conditions, beggary remains the only option available.

Table 2.8: Distribution of the Shelter less by Occu pation and Age Group

Occupation 5-10 11-14 15-59 60+ Total N Rickshaw Puller 9.80 11.55 30.44 24.57 29.04 13482 Construction Labour 46.10 48.65 39.33 34.88 39.72 18442 Coolie and Loader 0.48 0.68 1.41 0.63 1.34 621 Beggar 9.11 9.66 8.19 22.13 8.64 4013 Rag Picker 1.79 7.36 5.25 3.39 5.16 2397 Vegetable, Fruits and Ice Cream sellers 0.76 0.88 0.85 0.31 0.83 386 Domestic Help 3.80 3.11 2.61 1.50 2.64 1224 Self Employed 10.28 10.07 9.69 8.50 9.69 4498 Student 0.97 0.74 0.04 0 0.09 41 Others 0.97 1.35 1.20 2.99 1.25 579 Unemployed 15.94 5.95 0.98 1.10 1.61 748 Total 1449 1480 42232 1270 46431 46431 % 3.12 3.19 90.96 2.74 100.00

On the other hand, persons in the working age group do not from very high percentage

of beggars. Only less than one percent among them are unemployed. In the self-

employed category, there are more children compared to adults.

2.6 Level of Education

Low literacy level among the shelterless accounts significantly for their lack of economic

strength, especially in a city with very high level of average literacy. (Table 2.9).

Table 2.9: Comparative Literacy Level –Average Citi zen

and the Shelterless in Delhi

Category Total Male Female

Delhi Average 81.82 87.37 75.00

Shelterless Average 25.82 26.17 23.92

Source: Census of India, 2001 and IHD Survey, 2007.

Average literacy rate of the shelterless is almost one fourth of the city average. Female

literacy is lower than the male literacy as has been observed in city average as well. But

the gap between these two rates are much lower in case of shelterless indicating the

relative non-discriminating impact of general poverty – it robs both men and women of

skill development opportunities.

The head count reveals that approximately three-quarter of the shelterless are illiterate

thereby reducing the possibility of any skill development for improvement of their

wellbeing. Less than a quarter is educated up to primary level, while the percentage of

persons having secondary level of education is only 0.39. There are only nine persons

who are educated up to graduation level and beyond. Even graduate level education has

not been sufficient to help them coming out of shelterlessness (Table 2.10).

Table 2.10: Level of Education of the Shelterless by Age Group

Education 5-10 11-14 15-59 60+ Total N Illiterate 76.60 69.32 74.29 73.78 74.19 34447 Upto Primary 21.12 28.11 23.07 23.15 23.17 10759 Primary 1.86 2.23 2.23 2.44 2.23 1034 Secondary 0.41 0.34 0.39 0.63 0.39 182 Graduate & Above 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.02 9 Total 1449 1480 42232 1270 46431 46431 % 3.12 3.19 90.96 2.74 100.00

These graduates are scattered over four districts as isolated cases. Generally in each

district, close to seventy per cent of the shelterless are illiterate. In the North East

district, this figure is close to eighty per cent. They have only physical labour to offer as

primary input. This abundance of physical labour force tends to reduce the wage rate in

the informal sector and makes it difficult for the shelterless to came out of poverty line.

Even if some of them have acquired special skill, they are not open to more lucrative

opportunities because of illiteracy.(Table 2.11).

Table 2.11 : Districtwise Distribution of Shelterle ss Persons by Education Level

(6 years and above)

District Illiterate Upto Primary Primary Secondary Graduate & Above

Total

N % N % N % N % N % N % Central 3929 73.07 1305 24.27 117 2.18 26 0.48 0 0.00 5377 11.62East 2702 73.95 794 21.73 135 3.69 21 0.57 2 0.05 3654 7.90New Delhi 1165 70.99 441 26.87 32 1.95 3 0.18 0 0.00 1641 3.55North 5307 73.33 1733 23.95 154 2.13 40 0.55 3 0.04 7237 15.64North East 3407 78.56 819 18.88 100 2.31 11 0.25 0 0.00 4337 9.37North West 6191 74.03 1969 23.54 179 2.14 21 0.25 3 0.04 8363 18.07South 6359 74.36 2004 23.43 163 1.91 26 0.30 0 0.00 8552 18.48South West 1441 69.18 569 27.32 60 2.88 13 0.62 0 0.00 2083 4.50West 3829 76.05 1093 21.71 92 1.83 20 0.40 1 0.02 5035 10.88Total 34330 74.18 10727 23.18 1032 2.23 181 0.39 9 0.02 46279 100.00 Rickshaw pullers and construction workers are spread in all districts. Even in New Delhi,

where rickshaw pulling is not allowed in many areas, the shelterless assemble to

operate rickshaws, wherever possible. Rickshaws are one of the easiest vehicle to

acquire and it only needs one’s own physical labour to operate it. These vehicles are

available on loan against daily payments and do not require a license to operate.

Majority of the beggars can be seen in South district, one of the richest districts in Delhi.

There are may religious places in this district which offer food and open space to sleep

to the beggars (Table 2.12).

Table 2.12 : Distribution of Occupational Classification (14+)-Total

District

Occupation Central East New Delhi

North North East

North West

South South West

West Total Total N

Rickshaw Puller 33.36 31.09 22.58 31.86 32.69 27.72 25.13 35.81 35.27 30.27 13169 Construction Labour 33.32 39.13 37.54 39.09 33.47 40.65 42.16 43.48 41.83 39.20 17054 Coolie & Loader 6.36 1.31 0 1.34 0.3 0.82 0.61 0 0.42 1.39 604 Beggar 10.42 1.15 18.84 7.89 6.81 5.25 15.13 3.55 7.69 8.59 3738 Rag Picker 4.89 3.67 5.81 4.58 8.05 5.11 4.82 6.85 4.99 5.20 2262 Vegetable, Fruits and Ice Cream

0.26 0.52 1.07 0.06 0.30 2.40 0.94 0.00 0.65 0.83 362

Domestic Help 2.29 6.44 1.87 2.83 4.94 2.00 1.45 1.08 1.63 2.58 1123 Self Employed 7.53 12.23 10.82 9.31 10.70 14.32 7.99 6.65 5.58 9.65 4200 Student 0.06 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.04 0.04 16 Others 1.36 3.46 0.33 1.30 1.70 0.80 1.15 1.55 0.29 1.25 545

Unemployed 0.16 0.88 1.14 1.71 0.97 0.92 0.63 0.93 1.61 0.99 429 Total 5075 3294 1497 6785 4010 8037 8077 1941 4786 43502 43502

Chapter III

WOMEN, CHILDREN AND THE ELDERLY

Women, children and the elderly constitute the most vulnerable section of the

shelterless, requiring special intervention. This is not only economic problem but acute

social problems as well. In fronts are exposed to several diseases, leading to high child

mortality. Children constitute the child labour force in the informal sector, leading to

various economic exploitation in terms of long working and low wages and more severe

social exploitation specially related to girls child. Women also are explosed to several

dangers related to health, economic and social including trafficking. The elderly are not

capable of manual work in the fag end of their life, neither they are able to depend on

anybody. This leads to severe mental depression apart from other health related

concerns. The head count survey elaborates on some such major social and economic

concerns with long term implications for framing any inclusive growth policies.

3.1 Demographic Characteristics

As has been observed before, women constitute 15.65 per cent of total shelterless

persons in Delhi. It is interesting to note that number of girl children in all age groups are

less than half of number of male children. The majority of the shelterless do not bring

their families. But some families are there whose children are born in the pavements. It

is not possible to infer whether the number of girl child is less because of any kind of

negligence but possibility of gender bias in terms of access to healthcare and other

facilities may not be ruled out.

Children upto 14 years form close to 6 per cent of total male population while the

percentage is double for female population. Generally, men move in singles while

women come with families. It may be possible to correlate the number of women with

number of girl child. Whenever women migrates, generally they migrate with families

with possibilities of increasing the number of girl children and consequent need of urgent

policy intervention to avoid social miseries. (Table 3.1).

Table 3.1: Male Female Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Age-group Age Group Male Percentage Female Percentage Total Percentage0-4 249 0.63 108 1.47 357 0.765-10 1024 2.59 425 5.80 1449 3.1011-14 1109 2.81 371 5.07 1480 3.1615-59 36021 91.27 6211 84.81 42232 90.2660+ 1062 2.69 208 2.84 1270 2.71Total 39465 84.35 7323 15.65 46788 100.00

Majority of both men and women however fall in the working age – group. Even though

women move with the families, it may be a few cases where young girl accompanies

father or elderly mother accompanies son. Shelterless women are also part of workforce,

engaged in various kinds of informal jobs.

There are 208 elderly women compared to 1062 elderly men. The elderly constitutes

close to 3 per cent of total shelterless. Many of them are driven away from their homes

while some have left it on their own.

Youngest children (aged between 0 to 4 years) form less than one per cent of total

shelterless persons, much lower percentage compared to the elderly. It may indicate

possibility of high infant mortality rate through there is not enough data in the survey to

establish it. The elderly shelterless also comes to the street after being driven away from

families. Our sample survey in the next chapter shows more than 4 per cent of them

were driven away from the families.

Table 3.2 shows district wise distribution of the shelterless persons above 14 years.

Three districts, i.e. South, North West and North show maximum concentration of older

women while Table 3.3 shows that East, North and South account for maximum

concentration of girls children. This raises the possibility of employing girl children in

occupations like domestic help in these districts and also other kinds of social

exploitation. Girls form more than 27 percent of total children below 14 years compared

to adult women who are less than 15 per cent of total adults. About 1000 girls roaming

the streets of national capital are moving pictures of not only of economic poverty but

more deep rooted social problems as they are mercilessly being exposed to various

kinds of abuses including trafficking. Area specific micro studies are needed in order to

reduce such exploitation and helping them to come out of conditions of helplessness.

Table 3.2: Districtwise Distribution of Shelterless Persons above 14 years District Male Female Total


Table 3.3: Districtwise Distribution of Shelterless Persons below 14 years District Male Female Total


3.2 Level of Education

Illiterate children are source of social and economic despair with little scope for

upliftment. More than 70 per cent of shelterless children are illiterate. Even those who go

to school are educated upto primary level. There are only 58 children educated at

primary level and 10 at secondary level in a total of 2777 children aged between 6 to 14

years.

Illiterate girls are slightly higher in proportion compared to illiterate boys (Tables 3.5 and

3.6). There are 43 boys in primary standard against only 15 girls. In the secondary level,

there are only 7 boys and 3 girls in a total of 1480 children aged between 11 to 14 years.

There are several organizations providing education upto primary level in a informal way.

This may have percolated down to the shelterless level to include some such children.

But education at secondary level requires certain identification documents that the

shelterless do not possess. Alongwith the economic inability of the shelterless, the lack

of institutional flexibility also stands as a major hinderance towards skill development of

shelterless children.

Table 3.4 : Districtwise Distribution of Shelterles s Children by Education Level (6 to 14 years)

District Illiterate Upto Primary Primary Secondary Total


Table 3.5: Districtwise Distribution of Shelterless Male Children by Education Level

(6 to 14 years)

District illiterate Upto

Primary Primary Secondary Total N % N % N % N % N % Central 149 65.93 73 32.30 4 1.77 0 0.00 226 11.13East 167 72.29 55 23.81 6 2.60 3 1.30 231 11.37New Delhi 73 76.84 21 22.11 1 1.05 0 0.00 95 4.68North 242 74.23 78 23.93 6 1.84 0 0.00 326 16.05North East 188 78.66 48 20.08 3 1.26 0 0.00 239 11.77North West 191 78.28 44 18.03 6 2.46 3 1.23 244 12.01South 250 69.06 99 27.35 12 3.31 1 0.28 362 17.82South West 65 59.63 42 38.53 2 1.83 0 0.00 109 5.37West 149 74.87 47 23.62 3 1.51 0 0.00 199 9.80Total 1474 72.58 507 24.96 43 2.12 7 0.34 2031 100.00

Table 3.6 Districtwise Distribution of Shelterless Female Children by Education Level (6 to14 years)

Illiterate Upto Primary Primary Secondary Total

N % N % N % N % N % Central 44 57.89 32 42.11 0 0.00 0 0.00 76 10.19

East 91 70.54 28 21.71 9 6.98 1 0.78 129 17.29New Delhi 35 71.43 14 28.57 0 0.00 0 0.00 49 6.57North 102 80.95 22 17.46 1 0.79 1 0.79 126 16.89North East 69 78.41 17 19.32 2 2.27 0 0.00 88 11.80North West 59 71.95 20 24.39 2 2.44 1 1.22 82 10.99South 78 69.03 34 30.09 1 0.88 0 0.00 113 15.15South West 27 81.82 6 18.18 0 0.00 0 0.00 33 4.42West 40 80.00 10 20.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 50 6.70Total 545 73.06 183 24.53 15 2.01 3 0.40 746 100.00

Adult Illiteracy

Figures for adult illiteracy also shows the percentage of adult women illiterates are

higher than their male counterparts (Tables 3.7 and 3.8). Adult illiteracy level is slightly

higher than that of the children for both male and female. The adults who received

education also did not proceed beyond primary level in general. There are 146 adult

male against only 25 adult female who read at secondary level in a total of 43502 adults.

Only 9 men are educated upto graduation level whereas there is not a single lady

graduate among the shelterless. However, it is very disheartening to learn that higher

level of education did not help men to rise above shelterlessness.

This study once again focuses on the necessity of carrying out adult literacy

programmes. However, people do not find these programmes helpful as there is hardly

any value addition of literacy in their lives. It is imperative to create some visible value

addition along with flexible timing in these programmes in order to make them attractive

to the target groups. It is also desirable to generate employment through these service

creation. Poor educated persons may be encouraged to take up such activities with

government support.

Table 3.7 : Distribution of Shelterless Male by edu cation Level (14 years and above)

District Illiterate Upto Primary Primary Secondary Graduate &

Above Total

N % N % N % N % N % N % Central 3128 11.4 1015 11.7 104 12.1 18 12.3 0 0 4265 11.5 East 1921 7.01 605 6.99 102 11.8 15 10.3 2 22.22 2645 7.13 New Delhi 854 3.12 333 3.85 28 3.24 3 2.05 0 0 1218 3.28 North 4217 15.4 1392 16.1 122 14.1 36 24.7 3 33.33 5770 15.6 North East 2607 9.51 642 7.41 84 9.73 8 5.48 0 0 3341 9.01 North West 5156 18.8 1689 19.5 154 17.8 15 10.3 3 33.33 7017 18.9 South 5125 18.7 1602 18.5 134 15.5 19 13 0 0 6880 18.6 South West 1212 4.42 463 5.35 51 5.91 12 8.22 0 0 1738 4.69

West 3185 11.6 919 10.6 84 9.73 20 13.7 1 11.11 4209 11.4 Total 27405 100 8660 100 863 100 146 100 9 100 37083 100 % 73.90 23.35 2.33 0.39 0.02 100.00

Table 3.8: Distribution of Shelterless Female by Ed ucation Level

(14 years and above)

District Illiterate Upto Primary Primary Secondary

Graduate & Above Total

N % N % N % N % N % N % Central 608 12.4 185 13.4 9 8.11 8 32 0 0.00 810 12.6 East 523 10.7 106 7.7 18 16.2 2 8 0 0.00 649 10.1

New Delhi 203 4.14 73 5.3 3 2.7 0 0 0 0.00 279 4.35 North 746 15.2 241 17.5 25 22.5 3 12 0 0.00 1015 15.8 North East 543 11.1 112 8.13 11 9.91 3 12 0 0.00 669 10.4 North West 785 16 216 15.7 17 15.3 2 8 0 0.00 1020 15.9 South 906 18.5 269 19.5 16 14.4 6 24 0 0.00 1197 18.6 South West 137 2.79 58 4.21 7 6.31 1 4 0 0.00 203 3.16 West 455 9.27 117 8.5 5 4.5 0 0 0 0.00 577 8.99 Total 4906 100 1377 100 111 100 25 100 0 0.00 6419 100 % 76.43 21.45 1.73 0.39 0.00 100.00

Occupation

There are 2929 shelterless children, aged between 5 to 14 years, engaged in several

occupations, majority of them being associated with construction work. Child beggars

are also significant in number. The children take up all kinds of available occupation in

the informal sector to help their families. It is shocking to find out that less than one per

cent of these children are still students. More children are engaged in beggary than in

rag picking, close to 3 per cent are employed as domestic help. These figures show the

ineffectiveness of laws banning child labour as only 5.53 per cent of these children are

actually unemployed.

Male child workers are more than double in number compared to girls child workers

(Table 3.9). But unemployed rate is much lower in case of girls compared to the boys,

indicating the plight of girl child. Very few of them, i.e. less than one per cent are

students. Even there, the percentage of girl students are lower than male student. This

difference does not identify strong discrimination, rather it focuses on the helplessness

of the shelterless in raising any hope for their children.

Table 3.9: Occupational Classification of Children and Adults

Male child 5 to 14 yrs)

Female Child (5 to 14 yrs)

Adult Male (Above 14 yrs)

Adult female (Above 14 years)

Occupation number % number % number % number %

Rickshaw Puller 264 12.38 49 6.16 12761 34.41 408 6.36 Construction Labour 991 46.46 397 49.87 14192 38.27 2862 44.59

Coolie 16 0.75 1 0.13 563 1.52 20 0.31

Loader 0 0 0 0 17 0.05 4 0.06

Beggar 199 9.33 76 9.55 2891 7.8 847 13.2

Rag Picker 114 5.34 21 2.64 1918 5.17 344 5.36 Vegetable, Fruits and Ice Cream seller

16 0.75 8 1.01 286 0.77 76 1.18

Domestic Help 24 1.13 77 9.67 72 0.19 1051 16.37

Self Employed 203 9.52 95 11.93 3493 9.42 707 11.01

Student 20 0.94 5 0.63 15 0.04 1 0.02

Others 29 1.36 5 0.63 481 1.3 64 1

Unemployed 257 12.05 62 7.79 394 1.06 35 0.55

Total 2133 100.00 796 100.00 37083 100.00 6419 100.00

Unemployment rate among the children is higher than among the adults (above 14

years). These unemployed children are not going to schools also. These children are in

the danger of being potential drug addicts and quite vulnerable to other social abuses. In

the school going age, they are either earning for a living, or are doing nothing while the

parents are away for a living. Less than one percent of them are students, thereby

showing the bleak future and no prospect for a majority of them to improve their lot.

Many of them are born shelterless and are likely to remain so for the rest of their life.

Among the adult workers, rickshaw pulling and construction labour are the two major

occupations of the shelterless as has been observed earlier. A women also take up

rickshaw pulling, not for carrying persons but for carrying loads to a nearby distance.

Next to construction work, the women work as domestic help, while less than one per

cent of the men take up this occupation. Begging is also quite common among women

compared to men. Less than one per cent of the shelterless women are unemployed,

compared to one per cent of men. Unemployment rate among the children is much

higher for both boys and girls only to indicate that they will be employed in the same low

paying jobs once they come of age.

Proportion of child labourers ranges between 5 to 17.1 per cent in the districts. South

district, accommodating the highest percentage of shelterless persons also accounts for

the highest number of child labourers. However, in North-East, East and New Delhi

districts, accommodating relatively less percentage of shelterless, the proportion of child

labourers are much higher. Majority of child workers employed as construction labourers

are found in South district, while maximum number of children working as domestic help

is found in the East district. Maximum number of child rag pickers as well as self –

employed is also found in this district. Self –employed children are largely shoe-shine

boys. Child beggars are concentrated largely in the North district. If also accommodates

the highest number of unemployed children. Construction labourers are largely found all

over Delhi with the least concentration in New Delhi District.

Chapter IV

CHALLENGING INCLUSIVE GROWTH POLICIES

The headcount survey of the shelterless was carried on simultaneously with the sample

survey of 1997 persons including 1905 men and 92 women. This was based on detailed

questionnaires emphasizing different aspects of their livelihood pattern, economic

activities, connection with their native places in terms of economic and social linkages,

major risks in such conditions and future perceptions.

The demographic and socio-cultural characteristics of the sample population is tuned

with the general characteristics of the shelterless reflecting their strong representative

attributes (Table 4.1). The sample population is male-dominated with strong

representation of OBC and SC. Majority of them are married and are Hindu by religion.

A little more than one-third of them are literates. Sample literacy level (35 per cent) is a

little higher than the total literacy level as children are not included in the sample. We

took random sample of persons over 15 years. The elderly constitutes less than 3 per

cent of sample total, similar to what has been found in population total, majority being in

the working age group. The primary observations regarding the sample characteristics

show that the random sampling has been able to reflect all the attributes of the

shelterless population in Delhi. The samples even reflect the same locational

concentration as has been observed in headcount survey.

Table 4..1: Demographic and Socio-Cultural Characteristics of Sample Persons (Total No. 1997)

District Sex Social Group Religion Married Literate Age Group Total

Male Female OBC SC ST Others Hindu Muslim Others 15-59 60+ No. %

Central 9.71 9.78 11.98 9.30 1.15 7.09 79.90 19.59 0.52 79.90 43.81 97.42 2.06 194 9.71

East 8.92 7.61 8.68 8.92 12.64 8.11 89.83 9.04 1.13 82.49 29.38 96.05 3.95 177 8.86

New Delhi 5.35 7.61 7.21 5.28 0.00 2.70 82.57 16.51 0.92 74.31 49.54 95.41 1.83 109 5.46

North 14.70 5.43 18.95 13.07 5.75 7.09 80.35 19.65 0.00 81.05 47.37 95.44 4.21 285 14.27

North East 14.80 10.87 12.35 17.84 27.59 8.45 86.99 11.64 1.37 81.16 31.16 99.32 0.68 292 14.62

North West 17.27 15.22 17.11 19.72 21.84 9.12 92.42 7.29 0.29 86.88 25.07 99.42 0.58 343 17.18

South 16.06 29.35 11.37 12.44 26.44 39.86 49.55 49.55 0.90 86.19 26.73 99.70 0.30 333 16.68

South West 4.78 10.87 4.40 3.52 1.15 12.16 52.48 47.52 0.00 91.09 27.72 100.00 0.00 101 5.06

West 8.40 3.26 7.95 9.92 3.45 5.41 86.50 13.50 0.00 75.46 32.52 97.55 2.45 163 8.16

Total 1905 92 818 796 87 296 1563 422 12 1650 673 1958 34 1997 100.00

Occupational profile of sample persons also display the same characteristics. Rickshaw

pulling and construction work are two major activities, followed by begging and rag

picking. Begging attracts more persons than other occupations like domestic help or fruit

selling or rag picking. Unemployment is very low as observed earlier. All of the women

(92) in our sample are employed while we found only one man who was not working.

(Table 4.2).

Table 4.2: Occupational Distribution of Sample Pers ons Occupation Male Female Total (N) Total (%)Rickshaw Puller 607 1 608 30.45Construction Labour 712 22 734 36.76Coolie 83 0 83 4.16Beggar 146 44 190 9.51Vegetable, Fruits and Ice Cream Sellers 20 10 30 1.50Domestic Help 2 2 4 0.20Self Employed 181 5 186 9.31Others 53 3 56 2.80Unemployed 1 0 1 0.05Total 1905 92 1997 1997

4.1 Economic Profile

Shelterless persons have the only asset, i.e., physical labour to be used for employment.

The construction labourers, many of them being semi-skilled, assemble every morning in

specific places from where the contractors or others pick them on daily contract basis.

These contracts may not come regularly. But they are employed 150-180 days on

average. Rickshaw pullers are on their jobs regularly but their earnings fluctuate much

more than the construction labourers. Some of the shelterless earn their living by selling

vegetable and fruits. The owners of small shops are largely with shelter. It is the helpers

in these shops who sleep in the open. Many of such workers in these shops, however,

sleep inside thereby leading to underestimation of the number of the shelterless to

certain extent.

4.1a Reasons for Coming to Delhi

The findings here is complementing to earlier statement. It is the enormous economic

strength of the national capital that attracts poor migrants with the hope that they will be

able to improver their lots. It shows that known persons in the city have not helped

many of the shelterless. They have just come to the city to try their luck. Nearness to

residence has also not played much important role. It is clear from earlier tables that

nearest states of Punjab and Haryana have not sent many migrants to the city. It is

primarily the various opportunities compared to what is available in the native states that

have pulled the migrants into the city. Similar kind of jobs in the native places offer

much lower remuneration compared to the city. Hence, even if jobs are available, they

are not as much paying as in the city. It is this economic charm that makes a person

shelterless in the city. He is compelled to sacrifice his living environment for a better

paying livelihood. (Table 4.3).

Table 4.3 Reasons for Coming to Delhi Reason Male Female Total*Better Job 44.8 45.8 44.8Better Pay 42.5 45.3 42.7Near to residence 9.6 5.0 9.4Knew Somebody 3.0 3.9 3.0Others 0.2 0.0 0.2Total 3624 179 3803* Multiple Answers

4.1b Average Income Earned

Majority of the shelterless earns on daily basis. Their occupations, as has been

observed earlier, though very much informal, are continuous in nature. There is no

permanent employment contract, but same parsons continue in the services for years.

Majority of them (nearly 63 per cent) has a monthly income ranging from Rs. 2000 to

3000. Very poor among the shelterless (earning less than Rs. 50 per day) forms the

lowest percentage (nearly 8 per cent), while about 16 per cent of them earn more than

Rs. 3000 (Rs. 100 per day) per month. It is interesting to observe that majority of the

shelterless in Delhi are above the state poverty line (per capita earning less than Rs. 20

per day). It may be concluded that the shelterless in Delhi earns between Rs. 70 and

Rs. 100 per day on average. There are persons who earn close to Rs.200—250 daily as

well but their number is much smaller. (Table 4.4)

Table 4.4: District wise Distribution of Individual Income (Monthly) (Rs.)

District Upto 1500 1500-2000 2000-2500 2500-3000 3000+ Total Central 4.52 12.00 9.62 9.86 10.19 9.71 East 11.61 8.73 9.94 7.00 9.24 8.86 New Delhi 7.74 10.18 5.77 4.61 1.27 5.46 North 21.94 17.09 10.90 14.31 14.65 14.27 North East 4.52 11.27 12.82 15.90 23.57 14.62 North West 6.45 10.55 21.63 19.40 14.97 17.18 South 28.39 14.91 16.03 17.17 12.74 16.68 South West 5.16 5.45 3.37 5.41 7.32 5.06 West 9.68 9.82 9.94 6.36 6.05 8.16 Total 155 275 624 629 314 1997 % 7.76 13.77 31.25 31.50 15.72 100

The poorest shelterless largely reside in North and South districts, followed by East.

Symptoms of uneven economic development is very strong in the national capital. The

South district that accommodates the richest in the capital, also accommodates the

maximum number of poorest shelterless.

Gender bias is prevalent even in this meager earning pattern (Table 4.5). In the lowest

income group, the percentage of women is much higher than the percentage of men. In

the highest income group, their percentage is one-fifth of their male counterpart. We

have observed that all of these 92 women surveyed are employed. It is clear that their

average earning is lower than their male counterparts. Feminisation of poverty is evident

even among the shelterless.

Table 4.5: Gender-wise Distribution of Individual I ncome (Monthly)

(Percentage) Income (Rs.) Male Female Total (Col%) Upto 1500 6.82 27.17 7.76 1500-2000 13.49 19.57 13.77 2000-2500 31.13 33.70 31.25 2500-3000 32.23 16.30 31.50 3000+ 16.33 3.26 15.72 Total 100 100 100 Total 1905 92 1997

4.1c Average Expenditure

There is a striking similarity in the attitude of the shelterless as far as expenditure is

concerned. Majority of them wants to spend minimum in the city for material comforts.

There are very few persons in the highest expenditure range. It has been observed that

drug-addicts tend to spend on drugs whatever they earn during the day. Some of them

even earn Rs.200—250 per day, but do not save at all. They fall into relatively higher

expenditure category but the nature of spending makes them poorer. Otherwise, the

shelterless in general tries to save as much as possible. (Table 4.6)

Table 4.6: District wise Distribution of Individual Expenditure (Monthly) (Rs.)

District Upto 1500 1500-2000 2000-2500 2500-3000 3000+ Total Central 9.82 10.09 6.90 5.88 0.00 9.71 East 8.24 10.53 17.24 23.53 25.00 8.86 New Delhi 5.32 7.02 3.45 0.00 8.33 5.46 North 13.44 19.30 20.69 29.41 0.00 14.27 North East 14.20 18.86 10.34 0.00 25.00 14.62 North West 17.94 11.84 24.14 5.88 8.33 17.18 South 17.48 10.53 10.34 29.41 16.67 16.68 South West 5.14 5.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.06 West 8.42 6.14 6.90 5.88 16.67 8.16 Total 1711 228 29 17 12 1997 % 85.68 11.42 1.45 0.85 0.60 100.00

Table 4.7: Gender wise Distribution of Individual E xpenditure (Monthly)

(Percentage) Expenditure (Rs.) Male Female Total (Col %) Upto 1500 85.62 86.96 85.68 1500-2000 11.44 10.87 11.42 2000-2500 1.47 1.09 1.45 2500-3000 0.84 1.09 0.85 3000+ 0.63 0.00 0.60 Total 1905 92 1997

There is not much difference in attitude between men and women so far as expenditure

is concerned. Women seen to be a little more thrifty compared to men even in much

adverse conditions (Table 4.7). No women came in the highest expenditure category.

They try to keep expenditure as low as possible.

4.1d Remittance

Results of such thriftiness are evident in their savings. On the average, men are able to

send home around Rs. 12,000 annually. The women saves almost half of that amount

as they also earn less. Moreover is mostly spent on her family, thereby reducing her

savings capacity. More or less uniform patter in saving behaviours has emerged in the

districts. However, women have shown more fluctuations in saving behaviour compared

to men in districtwise distribution (Table 4.8).

Table 4.8: Average Annual Remittance Sent to Nativ e Place (Rs.)

District Male Female TotalCentral 13,734 13,000 13,725East 11,190 7,950 11,091New Delhi 13,017 4,250 12,806North 13,169 10,000 13,154North East 12,358 6,400 12,247North West 13,384 13,384South 11,497 5,727 11,217South West 11,428 8,333 11,299West 10,672 10,672Total 12,424 7,033 12,326

The shelterless person has informal ways of saving, mainly through persons known to

them. They deposit money privately and occasionally send home through them also. The

shelterless, on the average, are able to save annually about Rs. 12000 i.e. four times

more than their earnings. There is more or less uniform response among the shelterless

regarding the money sent home, yet it is observed that persons from Central district

send maximum remittance followed by North West and North. Women also send

significant amount of money back home.

4.2 Livelihood Concerns

The shelterless becomes shelterless owing to natural calamities, eviction from native

places due to political turmoil, war, etc., social turmoil or for pure economic reason of

finding better livelihood. The shelterless in Delhi have come here primarily for economic

reasons.

4.2a Reasons for Leaving Home

The respondents reveal that economic reasons are main driving elements for leaving

home, even for the women. Sociological reasons are comparatively insignificant though

sociological impacts of shelterless are far reaching. Persons who moved with families

are least in number among the respondents while number of persons ran way from

home or driven away from families together is less than 7 per cent of total

respondents. This reflects the level at which jobs are concentrated in the national capital

that makes its neighboring states poorer and increase regional inequality. The schemes

like night shelters are only short run solutions and unable to cure such long run

maladies. (Table 4.9).

Table 4.9: Reasons for Leaving Home

Male Female TotalRan away from home 4.30 1.09 4.16Driven away 2.47 1.09 2.40Searching job 91.65 89.13 91.54Came with family members 1.10 7.61 1.40Others 0.47 1.09 0.50Total 1905 92 1997

4.2b Dependent Family Members

The shelterless has to take responsibility of dependent family members both at the

native place and in the city. Our survey shows that among 1997 persons there are 110

persons with families in Delhi, 1534 persons with families in native places and 353

persons with no family. Average household size of the shelterless is 5.6. Majority of the

shelterless leaves the family behind to come to the city. Dependency ratios of these

families are double compared to those who have brought their families or those who

raised their families here. Sometimes people are evicted from their native place to come

to the city. Sometimes, it is the death of the only bread earner in the family that compels

the whole family to move to other places. They move with the elderly, children and

infants, who are exposed to all kinds of difficulties and threats in life. (Table 4.10)

Table 4.10: Dependent Family Members

Category

In Delhi At Native Place Male Female Total Male Female Total

Adult (above 14 years) 127 344 471 1558 2228 3770 Children (between 1 to 14 years)

285 298 583 1641 1613 3247

Infant (less than one year) 22 32 54 60 72 132 Total 434 674 1108 3259 3913 7149 Dependence Ratio 2 4

The high dependency ratios in native places compel the bread earners to move to the

city in search of jobs and become shelterless. They are not in a position to spend more

in the city neither can they leave the city for a longer time. They are very much in need

of places like night shelters and sanitation facilities for a little improvement in their quality

of life and to escape from hazards of spending nights in the open.

4.2c Identification Documents (ID)

The shelterless do not generally get benefits of several welfare schemes for want of any

identification documents. The sample survey shows that about one-third of them do not

have any kind of documents to establish their identity, either in Delhi or in their native

places. For the rest, the most common document they possess is the voter ID in their

native places. There is 35 per cent of the total shelterless who have these IDs. This is

one of the major reasons for visiting their native places.

Ration cards in native places is the next important ID, possessed by nearly 17 per cent

of the shelterless. However, they do not carry them in Delhi for obvious reasons. These

documents cannot be used in Delhi for getting any benefits. Persons with Delhi ration

cards are small in number. They require permanent address in Delhi in order to have

this document. Generally the shelterless use the employer’s address in the documents.

They also use the address of the local residents known to them. It is easier for the

persons working as domestic helps to find such address. The self-employed finds it

difficult to establish his identity. It is interesting to find that there are more shelterless

persons with local voter IDs than with ration cards though in both cases address is

required. (Table 4.11)

Table 4.11: District wise Distribution of Persons w ith Identification Documents

District Ration

Card(D) Ration

Card(NP) Voter ID(D)

Voter ID(NP)

Bank A/C(D)

Bank A/C(NP)

Driving License

No Documen

t

Total

Central 5.80 11.14 6.82 14.04 100.00 0.00 0.00 11.85 9.71 East 14.49 7.53 16.82 4.92 0.00 14.29 0.00 14.01 8.86 New Delhi 1.45 5.72 4.09 7.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.67 5.46 North 5.80 22.59 16.36 19.10 0.00 28.57 50.00 16.89 14.27 North East 8.70 8.73 9.55 9.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.74 14.62 North West 14.49 18.67 13.18 18.96 0.00 0.00 50.00 25.63 17.18 South 40.58 9.94 25.00 9.84 0.00 28.57 0.00 29.19 16.68 South West 1.45 2.11 2.73 7.38 0.00 14.29 0.00 6.67 5.06 West 7.25 13.55 5.45 8.97 0.00 14.29 0.00 11.70 8.16 Total 69 332 220 691 1 7 2 675 1997 % 3.45 16.62 11.01 34.60 0.05 0.35 0.10 33.8 100.0 D- Delhi, NP- Native Place

In our survey, only one person said that he has a bank account in Delhi while 7 more

said that they have it in their native places. They rely more on informal ways of savings

by keeping money among their own people. Only two persons have driving licenses in

the city.

Women hardly have any kind of ID excepting the voter IDs. They also do not have any

financial account that could show their access to finance. Possession of driving license

is very rare among poor women. Illiteracy is one major factor that prevents the poor to

keep savings in any form other than cash.

The three districts i.e. North East, North West and South, accommodating majority of the

shelterless, also show the maximum number of them without any ID.

4.2d Strong Linkage with Native Place In our sample of 1997, we found 1644 persons having families either in Delhi or in native

places or both. Some of them have brought the core families in Delhi, while relatives are

left in native places. They keep strong linkage with families at native places by

occasional or regular visits to fulfil social and economic obligations (Table 4.12).

Figure : Distribution of ID for Persons

3%17%

11%

35%

0%0%0%

34%

Ration Card(D) Ration Card(NP) Voter ID(D) Voter ID(NP)

Bank A/C(D) Bank A/C(NP) Driving License No identification

Table: 4.12 Strong Linkage with Native Place

Reasons Male % Female % Total %To Repay Loan 1186 74.50 27 81.82 1213 74.65To Provide Monetary Help 13 0.82 1 3.03 14 0.86Agriculture Season 161 10.11 1 3.03 162 9.97To Meet Parents 16 1.01 0 0.00 16 0.98Festival 211 13.25 3 9.09 214 13.17No Work in Delhi 2 0.13 0 0.00 2 0.12Family Emergency 8 0.50 0 0.00 8 0.49Marriage & Social Ceremony 14 0.88 1 3.03 15 0.92Fell Sick 4 0.26 0 0 4 0.24Total 1592 100.00 33 100.00 1625 100.00 Primary reason of the shelterless for going home is to repay loans (74.5%). This also

explains to certain extent why they have become shelterless. They carry huge debt

burden in their search or livelihood and time to time, they have to go home for meeting

debt obligations. The next major reason is the festival time where more than 13 per cent

of the shelterless make a journey back home.

Agricultural season also draws more than 10 per cent of them back home. They have to

save money for marriages and illness in the families. Only 2 persons among the 1592

males have gone back home because they did not find any employment in Delhi. Very

few persons went home because they fell sick.

No women went home because of sickness. Among 92 women, only one-third reported

going home, debt repayment being the major cause. Generally, one of the family

members go home in order to save transport cost. Some women go home during festival

time.

This survey also reveals the fact that money transfer is the major reason for which the

shelterless have to go personally. Following sections will bring out the fact more clearly

that whether in keeping their belongings, or savings, or transferring money, the

shelterless has various innovative informal methods that generally depends on mutual

trust, but when it comes to carrying money home, they prefer to do that themselves. The

formal sector has no opening for them either for depositing or for increasing their

savings. They continue to remain outside the mainstream development.

4.2e Personal Belongings By definition, the shelterless has very little personal belongings. But spending life in the

open with families, they accumulate things, however, little, and make innovative places

to keep them. We have found clothes and other things hanging from trees. They think

they can save their things from being stolen in this way. There are other ways of keeping

things which they follow according to their convenience.

The shelterless generally cook by themselves when they come back from work in the

evening. Besides clothes, utensils are their major belongings. Majority of them (61.26%)

keep their things with themselves (Table 4.13). This is possible for self-employed

persons. Rickshaw pullers and construction workers also carry their own things in the

vehicles or near the site. Sometimes, they keep the things in the shops or places where

they work. Generally, the shelterless do not change their sleeping place, unless forced to

do so. Hence, they keep their things where they came to sleep. Some night shelters also

provide the space for them to keep the belongings. Coolias have the coolie rooms for

this purpose, where they accommodate their friends also. A few persons have to pay

from their meager resources to somebody for the safety of their belongings.

Mother nature takes care of our personal belongi ngs.

Table 4.13: Keeping Personal Belongings

Mans Clothes Utensil

Male Female Total Male Female Total

N % N % N % N % N % N %

1. Carry with themselves 1167 61.26 74 80.43 1241 62.14 1645 86.35 91 98.91 1736 86.932. Carry in the working place 314 16.48 6 6.52 320 16.02 157 8.24 0 0.00 157 7.863. Keep where stay at night 401 21.05 12 13.04 413 20.68 52 2.73 0 0.00 52 2.604. Hired a place on rent 4 0.21 0 0.00 4 0.20 47 2.47 1 1.09 48 2.405.Coolie Room 5 0.26 0 0.00 5 0.25 4 0.21 0 0.00 4 0.206. Paid a person 14 0.73 0 0.00 14 0.70 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00Total 1905 100.00 92 100.00 1997 100.00 1905 100.00 92 100.00 1997 100.00

The same informal system continues for money (Table 4.14) as well. Majority of them

keep cash with their employer in good faith, and are betrayed only in exceptional cases.

Group saving is a way of informal savings occupation without the risk of carrying cash in

persons. These savings are generated among very known persons with mutual trust.

Very few persons keep their savings with friends and relatives. Trust on individual is

more risky than trust on communities.

One shelterless earns her living by keeping watch o n other shelterless persons’ belongings.

Table 4.14: Accumulating Cash Means Male Female Total N % N % N % With the Employer 1645 86.35 91 98.91 1736 86.93 Group Saving 157 8.24 0 0.00 157 7.86 Friends/Relative 99 5.20 1 1.09 100 5.01 Others 4 0.21 0 0.00 4 0.20 Total 1905 100.00 92 100.00 1997 100.00 4.2f Cooking Fuel

Major expenditure of the shelterless is on food. Cooking fuel constitutes a major item of

food. In order to economies on this item, majority of the shelterless use firewool as the

main cooking fuel as it is the cheapest. Kerosene is used by nearly 13 percent of

surveyed persons, seven of them can even afford LPG. Electricity is used by almost 4

per cent of them while more than one-third of them do not cook and eat in roadside

eateries (Table 4.15).

Table 4.15: Major Cooking Fuels Used

Category Male % Female % Total % Firewood 745 39.11 35 38.04 780 39.06 Cow dung 100 5.25 9 9.78 109 5.46 Kerosene 266 13.96 7 7.61 273 13.67 Charcoal 23 1.21 0 0.00 23 1.15 LPG 7 0.37 0 0.00 7 0.35 Electricity 87 4.57 4 4.35 91 4.56 Others 677 35.54 37 40.22 714 35.75 Total 1905 100.00 92 100.00 1997 100.00

4.2g Duration of Stay

Period of stay as shelterless indicates gradual long term nature of establishment. In all

districts, maximum duration of stay as shelterless is observed between 5 to 10 years.

Short run stay (less than 1 year) constitutes the lowest percentage. There is a kind of

stability in conditions of shelterlessness. It contracticts the myth that shelterlessness is a

continuous phenomenon, i.e., persons keep pouring in Delhi to make the problem a

never – ending one. On the other hand, the problem is much deeper in the middle,

persons who come as shelterless, continue to remain so. New shelterless persons are

fewer in comparison. It may indicate some kind of economic activities are taking place in

neighbouring states. It may also indicate that conditions of shelterless are becoming

permanent in nature. People, who came as shelterless, will remain so for at least two

decades. This also may act as deterrent to coming to the capital in search of jobs. May

be life in smaller towns are easier even with lower pay. There are however, significant

number of respondents who are staying as shleterless of more than 10 years, again

sending the very pessimist message.(See Annexure X).

South district with the highest number of shelterless also have the highest percentage of

long-term shelterless among them. The percentage of long-term shelterless is near to

fifty per cent in North East, North West and South West districts as well. These are the

major industrial belts in Delhi with concentration of manufacturing activities. Lure of

economics activities bring people in the industrial centers. However, in Delhi, tertiary

sector, the prime economic mover, is spread all over the city. Government and semi-

government offices in certain districts also account for localization of the shelterless.

However, it is not always the center for work but the availability of open space that

shows the concentration of the shelterless in these areas. This concentration will help in

allocating spaces for night shelters in the capital. It is apparent that in every district, the

maximum number of shelterless is staying since 5 to 10 years.

4.2h Long Working Hours

Average shelterless work for seven days a week. Employed persons are entitled to one

days leave, that is handly honoured. Wayside eateries, small shops, load carrying

activities in markets and .. are never closed. The risk of loosing jobs compels the

shelterless to make themselves available every day. Seven days’ work is associated

with long working hours as well. In some districts, women report larger working hours

than men. However, they also report 6 day per week sometimes. It is the floating

character of jobs that compel the shelterless to work everyday of the week and for longer

hours. It is equally true for the employed and the self-employed. (4.16)

Table 4.16: - Long Working Hours

District Male Female

Days Hours Days HoursCentral 7 9.5 7 10.0East 7 9.3 6 8.9New Delhi 7 9.6 7 9.4North 7 9.7 7 8.6North East 7 9.7 6 9.2North West 7 9.5 6 8.9South 7 9.6 7 9.4South West 7 9.7 7 9.6West 7 9.4 7 10.7Total 7 9.6 7 9.3

The rickshaw puller can hardly take rest in order to maintain the level of daily earning.

The coolies, the loaders, the rag pickers are always on the job to earn their meager

living. They have no other form of security than their own labour input. Ironically, they

are still above the poverty line and are ineligible for various welfare programmes.

4.2i Changing Sleeping Place

There is a kind of permanency in the nature of floating populations. It is observed that

close to 80 percent of them do not change their sleeping place, either in the open or in

the night shelters, provided they are allowed to do so. They may have to travel 15-20 km

to the work place, but come back in the evening in the familiar environment of persons

and places that is the substitute of native place left behind. They build up their small

assets in this environment and do not want to be shifted, even if to better living

conditions. This uniformity has been observed in all the districts. (Table 4.17).

Table 4.17: Districtwise Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Changing Sleeping Place District Changing Place

Yes No Total N % N % N %

Central 1029 10.65 4396 11.84 5425 11.59East 807 8.35 2974 8.01 3781 8.08New Delhi 365 3.78 1282 3.45 1647 3.52North 1404 14.53 5901 15.89 7305 15.61North East 787 8.15 3620 9.75 4407 9.42North West 1894 19.61 6541 17.62 8435 18.03South 1857 19.22 6768 18.23 8625 18.43South West 517 5.35 1575 4.24 2092 4.47West 1000 10.35 4071 10.96 5071 10.84Total 9660 20.64 37128 79.35 46788 100.00In our survey, only 84 men and 2 women said they did change sleeping place (Table

4.18). The women made this change only once as their employers left the place. Among

the men, 75 persons changed their sleeping place only once as they were evicted from

that area. Six persons made such change thrice as they changed their jobs while only

are is changing the place continuously as he is drug addict. The shelterless in general,

create a community of their own and feel safe in known environment in their floating

nature of existence.

Table :4.18 Changing Sleeping Place Male % Female % Total %Frequent change of Sleeping Place Yes 84 4.41 2 2.17 86 4.31 No 1821 96.04 90 97.83 1911 96.13No of Time of Changing Sleeping Place

1 75 89.29 2 100.00 77 89.532 1 1.19 0 0.00 1 1.163 6 7.14 0 0.00 6 6.986 1 1.19 0 0.00 1 1.167 1 1.19 0 0.00 1 1.16

Total 84 100.00 2 100.00 86 100.00

4.2j Awareness and Utilization of Night Shelters

It is the only scheme available for the shelterless persons. It is surprising to find that only

a little more than one third of the persons surveyed knew about the existence of such a

scheme. Even among those who knew about this scheme, nearly 70 per cent of them

decided not to sleep in such shelters for various reasons cited below (Table 4.19).

Table :4.19 Awareness and Utilisation of Night Shelters

Components Male Female Total

N % N % N % Awareness regarding Yes 688 36.12 25 27.17 713 35.70

Night Shelter No 1217 82.23 67 81.71 1284 82.20Sleeping in Night Shelters

Yes 263 38.23 15 60.00 278 38.99No 425 69.22 10 66.67 435 69.16

Reasons for not Sleeping in Night Shelters

Not safe 189 44.47 5 45.45 194 44.50Too crowded 163 38.35 4 36.36 167 38.30No facility 37 8.71 1 9.09 38 8.72Others 36 8.47 1 9.09 37 8.49

Total 425 100.00 11 100.00 436 100.00

Majority of the shelterless, who do not sleep in these shelters, consider the night shelters

to be unsafe for sleeping while a significant proportion of them think there is not enough

space to sleep in such shelters. We have taken up these issues in details in the next

chapter.

Night shelters – What is that?

4.2k Support towards Livelihood

The shelterless generally do not get any kind of support for lessening the hardships of

livelihood. However, nearly 20 per cent of men and 12 per cent of women said they

received some assistance from the NGos. These assistance come mainly in form of

blankets during winters and medicine. Very few have received any monetary assistance

as donation. Sometimes, they receive food and clothings from some charitable or

religious organizations. (Table 4.20). It is interesting to learn that the shelterelss women

remain outside the Stree Shakti Camps organized by the state governments. They do

not quality as beneficiares.

Table 4.20 : Support to Livelihood

Category Male Female Total

N % N % N % Receive Any Assistance Yes 364 19.10 11 11.96 375 18.78 No 1541 80.89 81 88.04 1622 81.22Type of Assistance Money 20 5.49 1 8.33 21 5.59 Blanket 278 76.37 5 41.67 283 75.27 Medicines 30 8.24 5 41.67 35 9.31 Others 36 9.89 1 8.33 37 9.84 Total 364 100.00 12 100.00 376 100.00

4.3 State of Basic Amenities

The shelterless requires medical facilities, sanitation and drinking water as minimum

basic amenities for maintaining their health. They cannot afford to fall sick as cost of

manhour loss due to sickness is very high for them. Physical strength is their only

capital. However, they are largely deprived of access to those minimum basic services.

4.3a Health Concerns

Majority of the shelter less do not consult doctors in the city for their illness. They go

home instead to get traditional treatments or just neglect the illness. The survey shows

that both men and women suffer maximum from malaria. Traffic related accidents are

also major health related hazards. They are prone to other job-related accidents also.

Some of them are aware of the pre/post natal healthcare and have taken their family

members to seek medical help. It is only 2 persons among 1997 surveyed who have

taken advantage of pulse polio treatments though the headcount survey shows that the

there are more than 300 infants among the shelter less. They are quite unaware of any

preventive medical care as is evident from the low percentage of persons taking any

vaccination. Very few of them are treated for malnutrition or child delivery related

problems. It is also quite disheartening to learn that they suffer more from accidents than

common diseases like cold/flu or diarrlioea. (Table 4.21)

Table4.21 : Seeking Medical Help Category Male % Female % Total % Consult Doctor Yes 618 32.44 30 32.61 648 32.45 No 1287 95.19 62 92.54 1349 95.07 Purpose Cold/Flu 65 10.52 5 16.67 70 10.80 Malaria 335 54.21 17 56.67 352 54.32

Diarrhea 26 4.21 0 0.00 26 4.01 Traffic related accident 78 12.62 1 3.33 79 12.19 Other accidents 34 5.50 1 3.33 35 5.40 Pre/post natal care 43 6.96 0 0.00 43 6.64 Delivery care 8 1.29 2 6.67 10 1.54 Malnutrition 8 1.29 0 0.00 8 1.23 STDs 4 0.65 3 10.00 7 1.08 Dental 8 1.29 0 0.00 8 1.23 Pulse polio 1 0.16 1 3.33 2 0.31 Vaccination 4 0.65 0 0.00 4 0.62 Others 4 0.65 0 0.00 4 0.62 Total 618 100.00 30 100.00 648 100.00

Even after consulting doctors, sometimes the shelterless do no go for follow up.

Allopathic medicine is the most common form of treatment, both among male and

female, while homeopathic treatment is most uncommon though the later is generally

cheaper. This may be due to absence of good Homeopath doctors in the locality. Those

who consult allopathic doctors also sometimes get back to traditional treatment because

of the cost of medicines.

Government hospitals are the most common place where the shelterless go for

treatment. They also visit local Primary Health Centers (PHC). Health camps are quite

common in Delhi but somehow, the shelterless may not have access to it as very few of

them have ever gone there. In rare cases they have also gone to private nursing

homes. It is heartening to learn that tuberculosis is not common disease among them.

Their visit to such clinics is negligible. They have also not mentioned this as common

disease. (Table 4.22).

The persons who do not seek medical care have cited affordability as the major

hindrance. The cost of medicine and diagnostic charges are beyond their capability even

if they go to government hospitals. Most of the medicines are not available in hospitals

or PHCs. Diagnostic tests cannot be conducted in the hospitals as either the queue is

too long or medicines are out of stock. Hence many of them keep on neglecting the

disease with the belief that it will take its own course. Age related diseases are hardly

taken into consideration as it is believed that these are only natural. (Table 4.23)

Table 4.22 : Type of Treatment Taken and Place of T reatment Male % Female % Total % Treatment Allopatic 579 93.69 26 86.67 605 93.36 Ayurvedic 20 3.24 3 10.00 23 3.55 Homeopathic 3 0.49 0 0.00 3 0.46 Pvt Medical Practioner 11 1.78 0 0.00 11 1.70 Others 5 0.81 1 3.33 6 0.93 Total 618 100.00 30 100.00 648 100.00 Place PHC 125 20.23 5 16.67 130 20.06 FPC 5 0.81 4 13.33 9 1.39

MCWC 8 1.29 0 0.00 8 1.23 TC 9 1.46 0 0.00 9 1.39 GH 453 73.30 21 70.00 474 73.15 Nursing Home 5 0.81 0 0.00 5 0.77 Health Camp 11 1.78 0 0.00 11 1.70 Others 2 0.32 0 0.00 2 0.31 Total 618 100.00 30 100.00 648 100.00 PHC= Public Health Clinic FPC= Family Planning Centre MCWC= Maternity and Child Welfare Centre TC= TB Clinic GH= Government Hospital

Table 4.23: Unaffordable Medical Help Reasons Male % Female % Total %Disease will take its own course 208 16.24 7 11.29 215 16.01Age related sickness 376 29.35 19 30.65 395 29.41Can not afford 564 44.03 33 53.23 597 44.45Medical facilities are far away 84 6.56 2 3.23 86 6.40Peak agricultural season 20 1.56 1 1.61 21 1.56Others 29 2.26 0 0.00 29 2.16Total 1281 100.00 62 100.00 1343 100.00*Multiple Answers

In Delhi casual agricultural labourers are very insignificant in proportion, yet some of

them have stated that they could not continue with the treatment as they had to go back

in peak agricultural seasons. Mistrust in the health care systems is also a major

deterrent. The shelterless thinks that the whole healthcare system is anti--poor and

nobody is willing to provide any facilities to them.

4.3b Sanitation

Generally the shelterless go to the free public toilets, though they are very dirty and often

without any water or electricity. Sometimes they use pay-and –use sulabh toilets also.

The severe dearth of sanitation facilities is evident from the fact that more than 36 per

cent of men and more than 46 per cent of women still use open fields for sanitation

purposes. The need for increasing number of community toilets with proper facilities is a

pressing one. The casual approach to one of the primary services in the national capital

has increased the threat has increased the threat to city’s living environment (Table

4.24).

Table 4.24: Access to Toilet Facilities

Access Male % Female % Total %Open Fields 689 36.17 43 46.74 732 36.65Public Toilet 953 50.03 45 48.91 998 49.97Sulabh 253 13.28 4 4.35 257 12.87Others 10 0.52 0 0.00 10 0.50Total 1905 100.00 92 100.00 1997 100.00 4.3c Drinking Water

Community tap is the most significant source of dirking water for the shelterless in Delhi,

hand pump being the next one. These two sources are used by 94 percent of them.

Community wells are much less in number in Delhi. Some of the shelterless bring water

from their work places. Supply of drinking water is not as acute a problem as sanitation

facilities in the city.(Table 4.25)

Table 4.25: Access to Drinking Water

Type Male % Female % Total %Community well 77 4.04 12 13.04 89 4.46Community tap 1085 56.96 63 68.48 1148 57.49Hand Pump 714 37.48 16 17.39 730 36.55Others 29 1.52 1 1.09 30 1.50Total 1905 100.00 92 100.00 1997 100.00

4.4 Risks of being Shelterless

Eviction threat and police harassment are two major risks for the shelterless. Close to 42

percent are afraid of the eviction threat while 30 per cent fear police harassment as the

major risk. The civic authorities are often armed with various regulations, especially

those against encroachment of public land. The civic authorities can evict people in

order to take control of public land without providing any alternative arrangements for

them. The police are accused of taking money forcibly from the shelterless on the

pretext of eviction. The shleterless do not change their sleeping places often as has

been evident before but they remain under constant threat. The recent policies of

industrial relocation and removal of encroachment for expansion of metro rail or

construction of temple are examples of such threat implying that the shelterless not only

have no place to sleep, they actually belong to nowhere.(Table 4.26).

Table: 4.26 Major Risks

Major Risks Male % Female % Total % Police Harassment 564 29.61 24 26.09 588 29.44 Eviction Threat 791 41.52 51 55.43 842 42.16 Threat to life 228 11.97 12 13.04 240 12.02 Others 322 16.90 5 5.43 327 16.37 Total 1905 100.00 92 100.00 1997 100.00

This is how we prepare ourselves to fight the winte r.

4.5 Hopes for the Future

Is their any gain for the shelterless from the city? Do they hope to live a better life?

Unfortunately, the shelterless do not even ask these questions to themselves as there

are no hope for any betterment for them. But on much insistence, they express their

desire with much doubt, the primary of being a roof over their head. They do not want a

permanent home, as this is a utopia, but some kind of shelter is their week demand. The

construction of might shelters will require less than one tenth of what is spent on Delhi

Metro but that urgency of implementation is pathetically absent. Even the existing night

shelters are in deplorable conditions for want of maintenance. We have taken up these

issues in details in the next chapter.

Next to shelter, employment is the major concern for which they have come to the city.

Some of them think that subsidized loans or provision of capital assets like rickshaw or

cycle may be helpful. Generally they get these things from the private operators at much

higher interest rate. Facilities like drinking water or medical help do not come to their

mind in a big way. This is not because they do not need it, but because of the frustration

that they will not get it. Women are more scare of the evictin threat compared to men,

Men are a little hopeful regarding childrens education though they answer with deep

despair (Table 4.27).

Table 4.27: Aspirations of the Shelterless Suggestions/Facility for

shelter less Male Female Total N % N % N %

Shelter, not Home 1572 82.52 88 95.65 1660 83.12Employment 1526 80.10 70 76.09 1596 79.92Money/Subsidized Loan 178 9.34 8 8.70 186 9.31Facility of Drinking water 145 7.61 0 0.00 145 7.26Capital Assets 16 0.84 0 0.00 16 0.80Children for the Education

36 1.89 0 0.00 36 1.80

No Eviction 20 1.05 4 4.35 24 1.20Medical Help 29 1.52 0 0.00 29 1.45Police Security 33 1.73 1 1.09 34 1.70Others 73 3.83 2 2.18 75 3.75Total Number 1905 92 1997Note: The percentage figures do not add up to 100 because of multiple answers.

Even with all the threats and hazards of staying in the capital, 67 percent of the

shelterless think they have no other options than to stay here. Fifteen per cent have no

idea of any future plans, reflecting the picture of desperation. Men and women think in

the same way in this respect. There is no gender bias in frustration. They do not see any

hope of going back, though they will love to as there is no prospect of better livelihood

back home. Close to 10 percent think they can go back as they have built sufficient

assets there. The assets are generally like acquiring a piece of land or constructing one

or two rooms that can be given on rent or starting a shop at home to make both ends

meet, when the most important input, i.e., manual labour cannot be used in old age.

Some people also think that if the present job is not sufficient, they will have to go back.

But for the majority, there is no hope of improving their conditions, no hope of going

back, just a desperate compulsion to maintain the status quo. The streams of welfare

activities for improving the lot of the under-privileged just bypass the shelterless.

Ironically, they still remain above the poverty line and pose the most formidable

challenge to any inclusive growth policy. (Table 4.28)

Table 4.28 : Future Perceptions

Future Plan Male % Female % Total %Will stay in Delhi 1273 66.82 66 71.74 1339 67.05Will go Back Home 178 9.34 15 16.30 193 9.66Depend on Job 159 8.35 2 2.17 161 8.06Did not Think 295 15.49 9 9.78 304 15.22 Total 1905 100.00 92 100.00 1997 100.00 4.6 Estimates of Shelterless Persons We have tried to project growth of shelterless persons in Delhi from 2007 to 2016. We

have taken two growth rates – one emerging from the Census (1991 and 2001) and the

other based on our example survey. In the sample survey we obtained data regarding

duration of stay as shelterless and calculated the number of persons staying as

shelterless in 2001, which was slightly higher than the census 2001 figures. Our

headcount survey showed the figures for 2006. Based on these estimates. We

calculated growth rate. On estimated growth rates are much higher than census growth

rates. The estimated growth of shelterless population based on these two rates are

presented in Tables 4.29 and 4.30.

Table 4.29: Growth Rate of Shelterless Persons Source Year Population CAG IHD Survey

2001 24,131 11.67 2006 46,788

Census 1991 18,838

2.41 2001 23,903 *Compound Annual Growth Rate Table 4.30: Estimated Growth of Shelterless Persons , 2007 -2016 Year IHD survey Census2007 52,248 27,574 2008 58,346 28,239 2009 65,154 28,920 2010 72,758 29,616 2011 81,249 30,330 2012 90,731 31,061 2013 101,319 31,810 2014 113,143 32,576 2015 126,346 33,361 2016 141,091 34,166

Chapter V

GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES AND IMPLEMENTATIONS

The Central government and the states have launched several housing programs for

the economically weaker since the First Five Year Plan. The National Housing Policy

has recognized housing for all as the primary goal and facilitated several institutional

and legislative reforms to enable both public and private initiatives in order to meet

the annual target of 2 million houses (1.3 million in rural areas and 700,000 in urban

areas) for the poor in the country. The homeless persons, however, till remain

outside this scheme as they cannot fulfill the eligibility criteria for owning a house.

The scheme of Night Shelters has been devised to provide some relief to them.

5.1 The Night Shelters

The Central Government launched the Scheme for Night Shelters and Sanitation

Facility for the Urban Footpath Dwellers in 1989-90, with subsidy up to 50 per cent of

the cost of construction subject to a ceiling. Balance can be taken from Hudco or any

other agency as loan. Land or site is provided by the state governments or local

bodies or other implementing agencies. Hudco provides loan for land acquisition also

if required. The states are the implementing agencies. They may recommend NGOs,

CBOs, charitable institutions, clubs, public sector organizations and others for

submitting proposals for construction and management of night shelters. The

financial agencies ensure that the implementing agencies have made proper

arrangements for maintenance before sanctioning loans. The state administrative

departments are the principal coordinating bodies for ensuring smooth

implementation of the program. At the national level, Ministry of Urban Employment

and Poverty Alleviation is the authority for preparing guidelines and release of funds

to the implementing agencies. This scheme has two components—

1. Construction of community night shelters with community toilets and baths.

2. Construction of only community pay-and-use toilets/bath for the homeless.

These two components can be part of an overall complex of commercial or

remunerative facilities.

The scheme has been renamed as “Night Shelters for Urban Shelterless” and

modified to be limited to construction of composite night shelters with toilets and

baths for urban shelterless. These would be in the nature of dormitories or halls with

plain floors to be used for sleeping at night and for other social purposes during the

day e.g. health care centre, training for self-employment, adult education etc, the

remunerative elements and provision for proper maintenance remain a part of the

scheme.

The modified scheme also allows commercial use of the complexes. The ground

floors of the night shelters may be used for shops, godowns etc. Existing commercial

structures also may be renovated to construct an additional floor to function as night

shelter.

The pattern of financial assistance remains the same subject to the cost ceiling of

Rs. 20000 per bed for night shelter. Balance is to be taken as loan or other help from

any agency. There is no ceiling amount of loan. The implementing agency will take

the full responsibility for maintenance of the shelters.

Pay-and-use public toilets, however, remain seriously neglected. For example,

MCD runs a total of 13 community toilets in Kalyanpuri, Janata Majdur Colony and

Tigri slums. Of these, six are already closed and seven are in an unusable state as

these toilets have neither water nor electricity (The Hindu, 4.6.07). The toilets have

been closed by the MCD stating that they are being under-utilized and there is no

money to maintain them,

A sample survey conducted by Mahila Progati Manch in these areas indicated that

out of 228 households living there, only 25 per cent of them have their own toilets,

the rest being dependent on the community toilets run by the civic body. They cannot

use the toilets as they are not properly maintained. One can imagine the plight of the

shelterless, whose conditions are much worse than the slum dwellers, without

access to these facilities. Public toilets are the only places where they can go for a

hygienic sanitation. Absence of such facilities is going to affect their living

environment. This problem is likely to be much more acute when night shelters are

used for other works during day time. The shelterless will be denied access inside

the night shelters for using the toilets as the occupants during day time may object

common access to these facilities for security reasons. The modified night shelter

scheme is going to spell more trouble to the shelterless in absence of public toilets.

There are two types of night shelters; - permanent and temporary. Permanent night

shelters are constructed with permanent structures while temporary shelters are of

porta cabin types, operational only for three months during winter. The governments

provide tents to the operational agencies for running these shelters. Blankets,

durries, drinking water, baths and toilets are the basic facilities provided in these

shelters. Along with the state governments, the charitable and other agencies also

donate these facilities. In the permanent shelters, users pay some nominal charge

(Rs. 6 per blanket per night) for using the facilities. There are no such payments in

the temporary shelters. The baths and toilets may be used during day time also on

pay-on-use basis with nominal charges. Currently, this scheme has been transferred

to the State Sector from the Central Sector.

The National Housing and Habitat Policy aims at providing shelter to all with time-

bound construction activities. The shelterless in the city, however does not always

want to live in the city. They want to earn more and send the remittance back home.

They do not like the idea of staying so far away from their relatives and communities.

They also do not want to spend on housing in the city. Slum housing is also

expensive for them and there are no alternatives than to sleep in the open. Night

shelters are the right kind of scheme to address the floating nature of homelessness.

Some times, very short visitors to the city spend the nights here as it is very

convenient and cheapest place to stay provided the basic facilities are supplied. The

scheme also provides the option for using these places as day-care centers or

training centers during the day for making them self-sustainable. The states however

have not shown much enthusiasm to implement these schemes despite the increase

in the number of shelterless persons. The following table shows the number of night

shelters constructed in different states and the related costs.

Table5.1: State wise Summery of Night Shelters for Pavement Dwellers

(As on 31.1.07) -----Cumulative

States Schemes

(No.)

Project

Cost

(Rs. Crore)

Loan

(Rs. Crore)

Beds

(No.)

Pay-and-use

Toilet Seats

(No.)

Baths

(No.)

Urinals

(No.)

Andhra Pradesh 5 4.03 2.14 2116 210 0 0

Bihar 5 1.28 0.48 1967 0 0 0

Chhattishgarh 6 14.82 6.90 0 2905 760 1007

Gujarat 2 2.09 1.06 50 1109 0 0

Jharkhand 3 1.46 0.79 2284 0 0 0

Kerala 3 0.5 0.30 358 0 0 0

Karnataka 1 0.94 0.00 0 7962 28 9

Maharashtra 34 27.15 0.00 0 2018 52 449

Madhya Pradesh 14 15.70 2.95 7133 206 412 323

Orissa 3 0.79 0.06 328 1038 206 0

Rajasthan 14 6.59 0.18 886 0 545 296

Tamil Nadu 1 0.09 0.06 150 0 0 0

Uttar Pradesh 2 0.97 0.50 1695 30 0 0

West Bengal 1 0.07 0.0 0 0 22 18

Total 94 76.5 15.40 16867 15603 2015 2102

Source: Hudco, unpublished data.

The above table shows general apathy of the states towards solving problems of the

shelterless. According to Census, there are close to 2 million shelterless persons in

India, even with modest estimates. The major urbanised states however have been

able to provide only 16867 beds to the footpath dwellers in the night shelters (0.86

per cent) covering less than one per cent of the requirement. Big urbanised states

like West Bengal, Maharastra and Karnataka have not provided any data regarding

these figures, even though Mumbai, Kolkata and Delhi account for more than 70 per

cent of the total shelterless persons in India. In majority of the cases, the states fail to

generate their share of the funds and the schemes remain abandoned. The situation

is worse in case of public toilets. Here the number of defaulting states is more, West

Bengal being the least performer among the states who have supplied data. The

states are preoccupied with the low-cost housing for the urban poor while the

number of shelterless, the most vulnerable among them, keeps on multiplying. In the

state plan schemes, the gap between target and achievement is the widest in case of

night shelters.

Providing shelter only to 7.89 per cent of the shel terless

In Delhi, the Slum and Jugghi Jhumpri Department of the Municipal Corporation of

Delhi (MCD) is the implementing authority of the Night Shelter scheme. They have

constructed 31 buildings for such shelters till now with accommodation capacity of

4710 persons. However 10 units, with capacity of 2511 persons have been closed

owing to various reasons. The shelterless was denied accommodation in the places

where their concentration was one of the highest. The night shelters at Turkman gate

( capacity 350 persons), Jama Masjid (capacity 800 persons) and Gol Market

(capacity 325 persons) were closed due to land disputes as MCD did not own the

land. Boulward Road night shelter (capacity 90 persons) was closed as the land was

required for the Delhi Metro project while one night shelter in Karol Bagh with

capacity of 60 persons was closed as a Coffee Home of the Delhi Government was

constructed on the land. There have been no alternative arrangements for providing

shelters to these persons. The other five shelters were closed as the operating

NGOs refused to continue further. Some of the buildings are being used for other

purposes like Haj majlis, community halls etc. Presently, there are 12 permanent

night shelters with a capacity of 2000 persons and 14 temporary ones with a capacity

of 1970 persons (Annexure). MCD operates 10 of the 12 permanent shelters while

the remaining two and all the temporary shelters are run by the NGOs, majority by

the Aashray Adhikar Abhiyan (AAA). MCD provides all the materials like tents,

blankets, wooden benches etc. while the NGOs provide for the medicines and other

items. Temporary shelters are operational for three months in the winter.

In the permanent shelters, essential facilities like drinking water, bath and toilet

facilities are provided. MCD has involved the NGOs on experimental basis in the

maintenance of the night shelters. It owns the capital assets and provides the cost of

running expenditure to the NGOs. The private sector is also involved with donation of

mats, blankets, clothes, medicines and the like. It used to charge Rs. 6 per inmate

since 1999 but has made it free since this year. Tenth Plan for Delhi earmarked Rs.

3 crore for the Night Shelter scheme. However, none of the 5 new night shelters

targeted to be built during the plan period has come up as yet.

5.2 Occupancy

All the night shelters are, however, not fully occupied. Permanent shelters have 80 to

120 per cent occupancy while in temporary night shelters, more vacancy has been

observed. In such a shelter in Raghubir Nagar in West district, only 20-25 persons

were occupying the place though it has a capacity of 90 persons. It is the temporary

nature of comforts that acts as deterrent. In the FGDs, it was discussed in depth and

people complained that they needed such shelters in summer and the rainy seasons

as well. Many of them have made some arrangements for facing the cruelty of

nature and do no want to disturb that for three months. There are persons who rent

quilts to them, sometimes illegally keeping the local administration in good humour.

These facilities are not extended to those who discontinue it. If the night shelters are

not fully occupied, it does not mean that there is no need for them. People

sometimes, do not want to disturb whatever meager arrangements they have made

as the opportunity cost will be higher. That is why; it was found that occupancy in

permanent night shelters are much better. In the permanent night shelters, some

inmates are staying since 15-20 years. In the FGDs, many of them could not

remember since when they are staying. They also do not change their sleeping

place. They travel 20-25 km. distance during daytime to their work place and come

back at night to the same night shelter. According to rule, a person cannot stay in a

night shelter for long. But the familiarity with the watchman, guards and local area

police leads to this advantage. The caretaker does not want to deprive the inmates of

this meager facility. Prolonged stay in a particular area helps to generate certain kind

of kinship. They form social network with inmates of other night shelters. This gives a

kind of informal security that helps in building assets in their native places. They do

not want to build houses in the city. Some of them prefer to spend for their children’s

education rather than spending money on house in the city.

The occupants of the night shelters are generally single as families with children are

not allowed. There are some arrangements for ladies in the temporary shelters, but

hardly anything in the permanent ones. Sometimes, man and wife with no children

take shelter in the temporary tents during winters. But families will children will have

to stay in the open.

There are criminals and drug-addicts, who surreptitiously take advantage of these

shelters. One cannot consume liquors inside the night shelters. So many of them

have it outside and silently come to sleep without being noticed. There are petty

thieves and burglars who come back very late at night. Sometimes, the inmates

know about them and discuss it openly but do not report to the police. They are

united through the bondage of poverty. It is also the reason that many shelterless

persons do not want to sleep in these night shelters for fear of pick pocketing.

Temporary shelter to be withdrawn after three month s

5.3 Alternatives to Housing

Permanent night shelters are seen as alternatives to housing. People from several

occupations are staying in these shelters. Even beggars come to stay in these

places. Sometimes, their daily charges are paid by their aquatints in these shelters.

People staying in these shelters are privileged compared to those who sleep in the

open. There are carpenters, masons, black smiths and other labourers whose

average earning varies from Rs. 50 to Rs. 250. They keep their belongings and

money in informal set-ups like shops as the shop owners are known to them. Some

of them keep it with the local residents as they are from the same native place. The

shelterless visit their native places during harvesting seasons or when they have

accumulated sufficient savings or to meet some family priorities. They make such

journeys even twice or thrice a year, but come back to the same night shelters again.

Their places are not occupied during their absence.

It is this kinship associated with the longtime stay that has generated a feeling of

stability among the deprived. We attended marriage ceremony among the beggar

families, who, with their meager resources, try to make the best of opportunities. It is

the informal nature of arrangements that help them to access a stable future in terms

of generating saving and asset. They cannot go to formal financial institutes as they

do not possess the required documents. It is the trust among the permanents

settlers, familiarized through long-term association that gets transformed into

material gain of saving meager resources. Permanent night shelters thus help in

solving the settlement problems to the floating population.

5.4 Perceptions of the Inmates

Welfare schemes in the social sector are designed with good objectives but seriously

lacking in implementations. Floating population may not like to spend on permanent

houses in the city. They would have gone back to their native place but for the job

opportunities. Night shelters are very good alternatives for them as the cost is very

low. People staying in those shelters for long have been really benefited though it is

illigal to stay beyond a few days. Permanent night shelters are very popular and

much in demand. Temporary night shelters tend to aggravate the sufferings when

the facilities are withdrawn. People get relief from extreme winters but there is no

protection from heat and rains. Locational advantages are also very important. The

night shelters in Turkman Gate, Dilli Gate, Nizammuddin etc. are over occupied,

compared to the capacity measured in physical space (1.5 sq.mtr per person). These

are the pockets of informal jobs as well. On the other hand, the night shelters in the

North-West and South-West districts are occupied below their capacity. It does not

indicate the abundance of these shelters or reduction of shelterless persons. Lower

capacity may refer to lack of facilities that need to be addressed. The night shelter in

Okhla is occupied below its capacity as people take shelter in the wholesale market

building where they do not have to pay even the minimum cost.

The officials pay occasional visits to these night shelters but do not pay much

attraction to the facilities provided. The night shelters in Jama Masjid and Old Delhi

Railway Station have broken water coolers with no water. The main problem in Raja

Garden night shelter is the stink from nearby drain. Fans are permanently out of

order in Nizammudin and Azadpur night shelters.

Night shelters are the best alternatives to the shelterless as even beggars are

utilizing these facilities. In Azadpur and Mangolpuri, we met a total of 30 beggars

who earn Rs. 100-150 daily, have their food in the religious places and come to

sleep in these shelters. Others take their meal in nearby roadside eateries.

Religious place also offer better sleeping spaces compared to pavements as has

been observed in Connaught Place Hanuman Mandir, where approximately 150

persons including women and children sleep at night. But all religious places do not

allow entry to outsiders for security reasons.

We covered approximately 200 inmates of different night shelters during our FGDs,

spread over all the districts of Delhi. They have clear perceptions regarding

advovatages and disadvantages of staying in night shelters. We try to summerise the

major observations emerging out of these FGDs in the tables below.

Table5.2 Major Reasons for Staying in Night Shelter s

Reasons Respondents

(%)

Reasons Respondents

(%)

1. Protection against bad weather 50 7. Near to work place

29

2. Less costly than slum accommodation

47 8. Near to work place of wives

27

3.Secured at night 55 9. Familiarity with local people

42

4. Basic facilities 67

5. Protection against police harassment

35

6. Permanent sleeping space 62

Note: Multiple Answers. Source: Results from FGD conducted by IHD

Majority of the inmates consider the provision of basic minimum facilities, i.e., bath,

toilet, drinking water and electricity the most important aspect of the night shelters. The

most vulnerable among the poor including the beggars also does not mind paying for

these basic facilities at affordable cost. The inmates find the permanent sleeping place

as another very desirable provision. The floating population is not so floating in nature.

Many of them are staying in these places for years. These places have become almost

like home to them. They do not want to spend on houses in the city and save fiercely to

improve the quality of life in their native places.

Night shelters offer protection against police harassment and possibilities of getting killed

by accidents or getting murdered. People are generally satisfied with security inside as

the gates close by midnight. These are manned by the MCD staff and not by the police.

Night shelters seem to be best alternative to people who cannot afford even slum

housing. Rents in the slum are higher compared to their affordability. The basic facilities

like electricity, water and toilet are also quite costly. The slum lords extract their pounds

of flesh from the poor though they themselves devise many ways to escape laws of the

land.

5.5 Major Problems

The inmates felt that the most significant problem in the night shelters in general is the

lack of maintenance. Toilet seats are not clean, water coolers are broken, fans do not

work, blankets and durries are torn. The maintenance persons are not serious about

these inconveniences. Their attitude is not positive towards the inmates. The staff thinks

that the inmates deserve no service as they pay very low charges. The purpose of the

welfare schemes are defeated by the attitude of the implementing agencies. Some

persons find it very difficult to go to the night shelters that are 5 to 6 km. away. Shelter

less persons are found even in posh areas of south Delhi. They are unable to utilize

these services as that would increase the transport cost. Shelterless persons are

generally single. Yet many of them who are living this life for long have families as well.

They cannot take advantage of night shelters as there is no provision for women and

children.

Similarly, the rickshaw pullers and the venders find it convenient to sleep on their

vehicles as protection to theft. Rickshaw pullers constitute a significant number of the

shelterless. But they cannot take advantage of these facilities in fear that their vehicles

will be stolen.

The space in these shelters remains unutilized owing to lack of awareness regarding

location of such facilities. Shelterless persons are largely illiterate. They would not know

about these provisions unless spread by word of mouth. The municipal staffs do not take

any positive role to create such awareness.

Table 5.3 Major Problems in the Night Shelters

Problems Respondents (%)

Problems Respondents (%)

1. Not properly located 62 7. Fans do not work 82

2. Not sufficient in number 87 8. Very dirty toilets 65

3.No place to keep belongings

72 9.No water in coolers 68

4. No knowledge 47 10.Lack of privacy and security as inmates are not known

53

5. No. place for women and children

76 11. Attitude of the staff not helpful

56

6. Blankets are very dirty 65 12. Stinking neighbourhood 58

Note: Multiple responses. Source: Results from FGD

A large number of homeless persons are drug addicts and alcoholic. Many of them have

escaped from home to get rid of stressful environment. They earn even Rs. 200-250

daily to be able to pay for drugs and remain in that state forever. They cannot get rid of

this habit even if they want to. There are not sufficient drug de-addiction centers in the

city. The existing ones largely cater to children of the wealthy and the pavement dwellers

hardly find a place in such centers. The lone drug-addict shelterless does not even know

that any such center exists. He earns as much as to pay for drugs and keeps on taking it

till the end comes. Sometimes he may enter a night shelter surreptitiously to sleep. He

will be thrown out immediately if the inmates know of his habit. It is also the reason that

many shelterless persons boycott the night shelters. They fear that they will be robbed of

their meager savings by these drug-addicts.

5.6 Future Perception

One cannot help noticing deep despair in shelter less persons who were surveyed or

who took part in the FGDs. They perceive their future to remain the same in near or

distant future as they have very little faith in government schemes or implementing

agencies. Government schemes are not sufficient to provide shelter to all shelterless,

even if they form less than one percent of total population. Night shelters are closed

either for want of maintenance or the land and buildings have been taken away for other

purposes. The existing facilities are not adequate. But the inmates are reluctant to talk

about it as the maintenance staff would not let them use even the meager facilities if

they complain. They are tired of answering the survey questions that, according to them,

will lead to nowhere. They are deprived of physical capital, but not of basic

understanding or realization. They even pity the surveyors who, according to the

inmates, have come to fulfill certain target numbers through these questions. These will

be used to fill up official records but no meaningful benefits will flow to make the slightest

change in their lives. This seems the greatest challenge towards forming any inclusive

policy for growth. The deprived believe that they are permanently excluded from any

redistributive economic programme.

Chapter VI

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Developing nations in general, have experienced rapid population growth and a

slow-down in agricultural production, the expansion of jobs and opportunities in

urban areas. These factors have caused a large increase in migration to urban

centers while the urban authorities are simply not ready to catch up with the civic

facilities in a short span of time. The consequences have been a large shortage of

housing and the growth of slums and squatter settlements.

It is always argued that the government does not have the required fund to provide

the required services. If we can classify the need for civic services according to

income group, we may find a direct linkage between infrastructural need of the

economically better off and comparatively narrower gap between target and

actrievement. The gap is much lower in case of higher quality infrastructure.

Globalization has accentuated the need farther. The pace at which highways,

airports, flyovers, metro rail and high-end housing projects are getting completed

with the public sector as facilitators does not reflect the real situation of other India,

where plan schemes like construction of municipal school buildings, supply of text

books to the poor, providing sanitation facilities to slums and building of night

shelters fall 80 to 100 per cent short of targets. This cumulative non-fulfillment of

targets leads to exclusion of certain section of people from the mainstream

development. We are suffering from age-old economic malady i.e., mal-distribution,

rather than shortage of resuources. This is very explicitly reflected in case of

schemes related to shelter less population of Delhi.

This survey challenges the myth that the houseless needs a house in the city. The

fact is that they do no even want a job in the city if they can find one in their native

place. They spend minimum on food and lodging in the city and send as much

remittance home as possible in order to make their lives comfortable in their native

places. They want to be back in their familiar places among their own community.

But ironically, may of them have to spend their whole life as shleterless in the city

which provides them the only major livelihood. The shelterless does not want to

spend on housing in the city. All they need is some shelter in the city at the minimum

cost. He would rather spend on his children’s education rather than on house as he

does not want to spend the rest of his life in the alien city. The affordable shelter on a

long-term basis matches with their floating nature of stay.

The government schemes of night shelters have tried to focus rightly on two

components of service-- shelter and sanitation. The per-capita construction cost per

bed in these shelters has been raised from Rs. 5000 to Rs. 20,000 at present. The

central government used to finance 20 per cent of total cost as grant while the rest

80 percent finance was to be arranged by the implementing agency, generally the

state governments, as loan from Hudco. The scheme has been transferred from the

central to the state sector with the increase in central assistance from 20 to 50 per

cent. However, the states do not show much seriousness in its implementation, as

evident from the financial records. In the currently modified scheme, some

remunerative elements and provisions for proper maintenance have been

introduced. Public sector undertakings engaged in construction works will identify

suitable sites for the night shelters.

The basic problem with this scheme is the casual approach of the states. In Delhi,

none of the 5 night shelters proposed to be constructed under state 10th plan, have

come up. Moreover, some of the existing night shelters are closed as land has been

taken for other purposes. The community toilets are not worth using for want of

water, electricity and maintenance. In many areas, deserted community toilets have

become dens of criminal activities.

In the modified scheme, commercial use of shops and godowns on the ground floor

has been allowed while the additional floor will be used as night shelter. This runs

the risk of misusing the premises unless monitored very carefully. In cities like Delhi

with very high market price for land, it is highly likely to use part of the additional

floor also for commercial purpose living very little space for the shelter less to sleep.

The night shelters may also be used for social purposes like training for self-

employment during day time as envisaged under urban poverty alleviation programs.

This type of use is less likely for misusing the added land. However, given the poor

record of monitoring agencies, the possibility of derailing the program remains quite

high.

There is no time frame attached for implementing these programs. Welfare activities

are treated like residual jobs. The inmates do not pay at all or pay very little for the

services; hence it is thought they have no right to quality services ignoring the direct

relationship between services and economic productivity. The shelterless may even

come out of their misery with uninterrupted supply of basic services that would save

time, the primary input of their productivity. The majority of shelterless are working

persons, fulfilling several types of needs of the city. If they fall ill get killed by

accident or vitiate the city environment with improper sanitation habits, enormous

economic and social costs are generated. But we don’t deal with the matter on

urgent basis as most of the losses are invisible. Opportunity cost of such deprivation

is very high, leading to maldistribution of human capital. The economic importance of

social welfare activities is hardly realized with the consequence that their provision

often gets low priority.

The scheme has been transferred to the state sector with the possibility of farther

reducing its level as the central government hardly has any effective control on the

state sector schemes. They can stop the grants but that does not serve the purpose

of reducing the level of deprivation. Centrally sponsored schemes like Swarna

Jayanti Sahari Rojgar Yojana and Sarva Sikhsha Abhiyan have stopped midway in

many states as they failed to raise the matching financial assistance.

Even in much publicized. Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission

(JNNURM), the emphasize is on capital expenditure in water supply, solid waste

management and sewerage projects, rather than on welfare schemes. Schemes like

provision of housing for the Economically Weaker Section (EWS) are categorized as

optional activity for the states, indicating the casual nature of concern towards

reducing deprivation. Time frame for poverty alleviation programs is loosely

mentioned as within seven years. The problems of the shelterless hardly find any

mention in the schemes of urban renewal. Land is not earmarked for night shelters

and community toilets. The zonal plans also do not refer to them..

It seems the problems of the shelterless, however economically serious and socially

acute, is not politically sensitive enough as the shelterless are hardly voters. They do

not have any permanent address or any identity card owing to their floating nature of

existence. Even if they are staying in the city for long and working almost in the same

place for years, they cannot come out of their rootless characteristics and make any

claim on the city assets. They constitute less than one percent of city population,

thereby also reducing their weightage as vote banks. Hence, their voice is largely

unheard even though their absolute number is significant.

The problems of shelter less is not only in terms of physical deprivation i.e., non-

availability of housing and infrastructure, but in terms of social exclusion as well. The

attempts to provide decent housing to the poor in the absence of adequate access to

educational or health facilities or livelihood options, they cannot come out of the

vicious cycle of poverty. They are often identified with crime, substance abuse and

all other negatives associated will bad development. The common characteristics of

large metropolises is spatial concentration of poverty, deprivation and human

suffering in terms of social exclusions, employment, indebtedness and

houselessness. At the heart of this process is the issue of land ownership, the right

of land and the right to the city.

The shelterless has common access to the market of leftovers in downtown areas of

the cities where things are discarded. Exclusion has provoked the re-creation of

urban space, where the shelterless builts his home and establishes his place in the

world. The vehicle used for livelihood purpose is one example of such recreation. It

combines both functions-a work tool to pick up human beings or materials and a

place to sleep. The shelterless keeps his personal belonging in the rickshaw, use it

for livelihood and sleeps in it. It is his rootlessness character that prevents him to find

a place in the society and to be integrated in the mainstream development process.

Recommendations

Construction of night shelters at rapid pace is the prior requirement for the

shelterless. At present, these shelters accommodate less than 8 per cent of

the total shelterless in Delhi.

Proper maintenance facilities in these shelters is a priority. These can be

implemented with involvement of community-based organizations.

There are significant employment generation possibilities through these

welfare services. Involvement of slum women in maintenance and

supervisory activities in night shelters may be considered.

The problem of lack of identification documents should be seriously

explored. They should get some kind of such document based on

photograph with primary data about him or her self even if they do not have a

permanent address. It is observed that generally the shelteress do not

change their place to sleep or occupation. They need some kind of identity in

order to establish credentials in work place or elsewhere.

Pay-and-use toilets and community toilets are need of the hour. These are

the only means of providing sanitation to them. These should be constructed

in time-bound manner and maintenance should be given to CBOs, rather

than any single organization. The government need to revamp its monitoring

activities in this regard.

It is a welcome sign that Delhi Master Plan 2021 has considered construction

of more night shelters in crowded places. It is hoped that proper sites will be

identified shortly and construction should begin immediately.

The shelterless are not aware about night shelter schemes. The DSW should

take proper initiative to popularize these schemes as and when they are

available.

Adult literacy programmes need to include the shelterless with proper value

addition to their lives. The illiterate adult should be able to realize some

economic benefits of literacy. They may be involved in maintenance of

community assets and be paid for these activities. The services of the elderly

may be considered in these programmes.

The welfare programmes like Stree Shakti Camps should include the

shelterless women as major beneficiaries.

Active government participation is required in spreading informal education at

all level. The employers should be encouraged to be involved in such

programmes with some tax benefits. We are used to offer huge tax subsidies

to the SEZs all over the country. It is high time to link up welfare activities to

tax subsidies.

There should be a regular census of shelterless persons every three years in

order to estimate their size and measure to what extent, development

policies have been able to be inclusive. Local bodies may take up these tasks

at ward level.

The states are gearing to develop sophisticated database for getting benefits

under the JNNURM. This opportunity should be exploited in removing the

symptom of shelterlessness in a time bound manner.

The state and the local bodies should prepare a time bound action plan with

proper monitoring mechanism to deal with the problem of shelterless.

The shelterless need to be included in the implementation welfare policies.

They should not be only at the receiving end.

References

1. Aashray Adhikar Abhiyan, 2001, The Capital’s Homeless

2. Census Of India 1991, Instructions to enumerators for filling up the household schedule and individual slip, Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner for India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi.

3. DDA, 1989. “Survey of Pavement Dwellers in Old Delhi”, unpublished study, Slum and Jhuggi-Jhopri Department, Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi.

4. DDA, 1990. Master Plan for Delhi-2001, Delhi Development Authority, New Delhi.

5. Dupont (V), Tingal (D), 1997 “Residential and Economic Practices of Pavement Dwellers in Old Delhi”, Institute of Economic Growth, Working paper series, No.F/186/97, Delhi.

6. Gupta (D.B.) Kaul (S), Pandey (R), 1993, Housing and India’s Urban Poor, Har Anand Publications, New Delhi.

7. Jain (A.K.), 1996, The Indian Megacity and Economic Reforms, Management Publishing Co., New Delhi.

8. Kundu (A), 1993, In the Name of the Urban Poor - Access to Basic Amenities, Sage, New Delhi.

9. Kurvilla (J), 1990-91, “Pavement Dwelling in Metropolitan Cities - Case study Delhi”. Thesis, School of Planning and Architecture, Deptt. of Housing, New Delhi, Mimeo.

10. NIUA, 1986, Dimension of Urban Poverty - A Situational Analysis. National Institute of Urban Affairs, Research Study Series No. 25, New Delhi.

11. NIUA, 1989, Profile of the Urban Poor: An Investigation into their Demographic, Economic and Shelter Characterstics, National Institute of Urban Affairs, Research Study Series No. 40, New Delhi.

12. SPARC, 1985, “We the Invisible”, Report on Pavement Dwellers in Bombay, SPARC, Bombay.

ANNEXURE

Annexure 1: Districtwise Distribution of Shelterless Persons by Migration

State Central East New

Delhi North North

East North West

South South West

West Total (%)

Total (N)

AP 0.41 0.50 0.00 0.07 0.09 0.38 0.07 0.00 0.41 0.23 109Assam 0.07 0.05 0.61 0.82 0.00 1.08 2.10 1.24 0.57 0.86 403Blhar 28.57 25.55 36.61 31.90 25.12 36.47 29.46 32.50 31.79 30.92 14465Chttishgharh 0.15 1.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.02 0.18 82Delhi 1.14 1.22 1.82 2.27 1.41 1.24 1.57 1.10 1.56 1.51 708Gujarat 0.02 0.16 0.36 0.08 0.07 0.00 0.35 0.29 0.16 0.14 66Haryana 0.65 1.06 1.52 1.04 0.48 0.68 0.30 0.62 0.53 0.68 320HP 0.09 0.21 0.00 0.01 0.11 0.18 0.00 0.10 0.16 0.09 44Jharkhand 2.78 0.45 1.70 1.88 1.38 1.22 2.03 1.43 2.03 1.72 805JK 0.63 0.21 0.00 0.37 0.00 0.20 0.03 0.10 0.16 0.21 99Karnatka 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.43 0.00 0.06 0.00 1.05 0.21 99Kerala 0.13 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.14 0.04 20Maharastra 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 0.04 17MP 12.85 7.91 8.01 10.29 7.37 8.84 9.77 13.81 13.47 10.19 4766Nepal 0.02 0.05 0.12 0.22 0.32 0.08 0.07 0.14 0.00 0.11 51Orrisa 1.05 0.40 1.03 1.46 0.59 0.96 1.54 0.96 1.42 1.13 528Punjab 0.50 0.34 0.00 1.27 0.95 0.25 0.54 0.00 0.69 0.59 278Rajasthan 5.38 11.58 4.43 4.94 11.73 9.80 5.80 4.83 3.96 7.07 3310TN 0.07 0.00 0.18 0.07 0.00 0.08 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.05 24UP 38.05 44.88 35.40 36.41 42.34 34.32 36.92 37.57 35.59 37.49 17540Uttranchal 0.46 0.13 0.00 0.42 0.59 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.61 0.31 143WB 6.99 3.91 8.20 6.16 7.01 4.05 8.92 5.16 5.34 6.22 2911Total(%) 11.59 8.08 3.52 15.61 9.42 18.03 18.43 4.47 10.84 100.00 46788Total(N ) 5425 3781 1647 7305 4407 8435 8625 2092 5071 46788

Annexure Table II: Location of Homeless Persons and the Night Shelters

District Areas of Major

Concentration of Homeless Persons

Homeless Persons (No.)

Location of Night Shelters

Capacity (No)

Managed by

Central Ajmeri Gate 5425 1. Jhandenwala Road

60 Aashray Adhikar Abhiyan (AAA)—(T)

Asaf Ali Raod

Dariyaganj

Dev Nagar

Jhandenwala 2. Jhandenwala Road

60 AAA (T)

Karol Bagh

Meena Bazar

Minto Road

Moti Nagar 3. Karol Bagh 50 AAA(T)

Nanak Pura

New Delhi Railway Station

4. Yamuna Pusta 400 AAA (T)

Paharganj

Turkman Gate 5. Ram Nagar 70 AAA (T)

Yamuna Pusta

East Akshardham Mandir 3781 6. Roshenara Road

250 MCD Slum Wing (P)

Anand Vihar

Church Mission Road

7.Church Mission Road

500 AAA (T)

Geeta Colony

Ganesh Nagar

Jhilmil

Karkardooma

Kirti Nagar

Kondli Sabji Mandi

Krishna Nagar

Laxmi Nagar

Mayur Vihar

Noidamore

Preet Vihar

Roshanara Park

Trilokpuri

Vivek Vihar, Vishwas Nagar

New Delhi

Bapudham 1647 8.Hanuman Mandir 150 Kirandeep Sharaan (T)

Bangla Shahib

Gole Market

Hanuman Manidr

Mandir Marg

Rajeev Chowk

Contd.

District Areas of Major Concentration of Homeless Persons



Capacity (No)

Managed by

Shankar Market

North Anand Parvat 7305 9.Delhi Gate 80 MCD Slum Wing (P)

Andha Mughal

Chandni Chowk

Delhi Gate 10. Rani Jhansi Road


Jama Masjid

11. Lahori Gate 250 MCD Slum Wing (P)

Jamuna Bazzar

Kamla Nagar 12.Chadni Chowk 200 AAA (P)

Kauria Bridge

Khari Baoli

Khoya Mandi

Lahori Gate 13. Mori Gate 50 AAA(T)

Lal Qila

Majnu ka Tila 14. Mori Gate 400 AAA (T)

Mukharji Road

Purani Delhi Railway Station

15. Old Delhi Railway Station

60 AAA (T)

Rani Jhansi Road

Sadar Market

Shakti Nagar

Yamuna Bridge 16. Malka Ganj 150 AAA (T)

North East

Babarpur 4407 17. Shahadra 40 MCD Slum Wing (P)

Bhajanpura

D.U.

G.T. Road Flyover

Gagan Vihar

Gokul Puri

I.S.B.T.

Loni Border 18. Nand Nagri 100 AAA (T)

Nand Nagri

Seelampur

Seema Puri

Shahadra

North West

Aadarsh Nagar 8435 19. Shehzada Bagh 200 MCD Slum Wing (P)

Ambedkar Nagar

Azadpur

Daya Basti

Dhaka Colony

Contd. District Areas of Major




Capacity (No)

Managed by

J.J. Colony

Kashmere Gate 20. Kashmere Gate

200 AAA (T)

Lawrance Road

Mukharji Nagar

S.P. Mukharji Road 21. Jahangir Puri 100 MCD Slum Wing (P)

Shehzada Bagh

Salimar Bagh

Sant Nagar

Sarai Rohila

Shadipur

Shakar Pur

Trinagar

Wazirapur

South Amar Colony 8625 22. Nizammuddin Basti


Ashram

Badarpur

Bhogal

Chhatar Pur

Chirag Delhi

Govind Puri

Hauj Khas

Kalkaji

Kasturba Nagar

Lajpat Nagar

Lodhi Road

Nehru Place

Nijamuddin

Okhla Sabji Mandi

Sangam Vihar

Sarita Vihar

Sundar Nagar

South West

Inder Puri 2092

Kabul Nagar

Madhu Vihar

Munirka

Narayana

Sadh Nagar

Vasant Vihar

Contd. District Areas of Major




Capacity (No)

Managed by

West Ghanta Ghar 5071 23. Raja Garden 100 MCD Slum Wing (P)

Hari Nagar

Zakhira Bridge

Janakpuri

Mangol Puri 24. Mangol Puri 100 MCD Slum Wing (P)

Maya Puri

Najafghad

Netaji Subhash Marg

Patel Nagar

Piragadi

Pitampura

Raja Garden

Rajinder Nagar

Rajouri Garden

Uttam Nagar

Total 46788 24 3696(7.89%) Note; P—permanent, T—temporary. Temporary shelters are operational for 3 months during winter in a year.

Annexure III : Districtwise Distribution of Shelter less Persons by Education Level- Women

(6 years and above)

District Illiterate Upto Primary Primary Secondary Graduate & Above

Total

N % N % N % N % N % N % Central 652 73.59 217 24.49 9 1.02 8 0.90 0 0.00 886 12.37East 614 78.92 134 17.22 27 3.47 3 0.39 0 0.00 778 10.86New Delhi 238 72.56 87 26.52 3 0.91 0 0.00 0 0.00 328 4.58North 848 74.32 263 23.05 26 2.28 4 0.35 0 0.00 1141 15.92North East 612 80.85 129 17.04 13 1.72 3 0.40 0 0.00 757 10.57North West 844 76.59 236 21.42 19 1.72 3 0.27 0 0.00 1102 15.38South 984 75.11 303 23.13 17 1.30 6 0.46 0 0.00 1310 18.28South West 164 69.49 64 27.12 7 2.97 1 0.42 0 0.00 236 3.29West 495 78.95 127 20.26 5 0.80 0 0.00 0 0.00 627 8.75 Total 5451 76.08 1560 21.77 126 1.76 28 0.39 0 0.00 7165 100.00

Annexure IV: Districtwise Distribution of Occupational Classification

(above 14 years) Occupation District

Central

East New Delhi

North North East

North West

South South West

West Total Total N

Ricksha Puller 33.36 31.09 22.58 31.86 32.69 27.72 25.13 35.81 35.27 30.27 13169 Construction Labour 33.32 39.13 37.54 39.09 33.47 40.65 42.16 43.48 41.83 39.20 17054 Coolie 6.36 1.31 0.00 1.31 0.30 0.58 0.61 0.00 0.42 1.34 583 Loader 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 21 Begger 10.42 1.15 18.84 7.89 6.81 5.25 15.13 3.55 7.69 8.59 3738 Rag Picker 4.89 3.67 5.81 4.58 8.05 5.11 4.82 6.85 4.99 5.20 2262 Unemployed 0.16 0.88 1.14 1.71 0.97 0.92 0.63 0.93 1.61 0.99 429 Vegetable, Fruits and Ice Cream 0.26 0.52 1.07 0.06 0.30 2.40 0.94 0.00 0.65 0.83 362 Domestic Help 2.29 6.44 1.87 2.83 4.94 2.00 1.45 1.08 1.63 2.58 1123 Self Employed 7.53 12.23 10.82 9.31 10.70 14.32 7.99 6.65 5.58 9.65 4200 Student 0.06 0.12 0.00 0.03 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.04 0.04 16 Others 1.36 3.46 0.33 1.30 1.70 0.80 1.15 1.55 0.29 1.25 545 Total 5075 3294 1497 6785 4010 8037 8077 1941 4786 43502 43502 Annexure V: District-wise Distribution of Occupatio nal Classification Male

(Above 14 years) Occupation Central East New

Delhi North North

East North West

South South West

West Total Total

Ricksha Puller 38.78 37.77 26.35 35.86 37.53 30.74 28.56 39.64 39.27 34.41 12761

Construction Labour 32.08 38.56 36.70 38.09 33.64 40.22 41.09 40.22 40.08 38.27 14192

Coolie 7.27 1.59 0.00 1.46 0.36 0.67 0.71 0.00 0.45 1.52 563

Loader 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 17

Begger 9.28 0.87 18.06 7.18 6.47 4.39 13.79 3.80 7.10 7.80 2891

Rag Picker 4.64 3.33 5.67 4.78 8.08 4.97 4.96 7.02 4.87 5.17 1918Vegetable, Fruits and Ice Cream 0.21 0.49 1.15 0.03 0.36 2.12 0.94 0.00 0.52 0.77 286

Domestic Help 0.05 0.64 0.33 0.28 0.09 0.11 0.20 0.12 0.14 0.19 72

Self Employed 6.42 12.02 9.93 8.93 10.63 14.74 7.76 6.33 5.51 9.42 3493

Student 0.07 0.15 0.00 0.02 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.05 0.04 15

Others 1.01 3.63 0.41 1.51 1.92 0.83 1.25 1.73 0.29 1.30 481

Unemployed 0.19 0.95 1.40 1.84 0.84 1.00 0.73 1.04 1.71 1.06 394

Total 4265 2645 1218 5770 3341 7017 6880 1738 4209 37083 37083

Annexure VI: District-wise Distribution of Occupational Classification: Female (Above 14 years)

Occupation Central East New

Delhi North North

East North West

South South West

West Total Total

Ricksha Puller 4.81 3.85 6.09 9.16 8.52 6.96 5.43 2.96 6.07 6.36 408Construction Labour 39.88 41.45 41.22 44.73 32.59 43.63 48.29 71.43 54.59 44.59 2862Coolie 1.60 0.15 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.31 20Loader 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 4Begger 16.42 2.31 22.22 11.92 8.52 11.18 22.81 1.48 11.96 13.20 847Rag Picker 6.17 5.08 6.45 3.45 7.92 6.08 4.01 5.42 5.89 5.36 344Unemployed 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.99 1.64 0.39 0.08 0.00 0.87 0.55 35Vegetable, Fruits and Ice Cream 0.49 0.62 0.72 0.20 0.00 4.31 0.92 0.00 1.56 1.18 76Domestic Help 14.07 30.05 8.60 17.34 29.15 15.00 8.60 9.36 12.48 16.37 1051Self Employed 13.33 13.10 14.70 11.53 11.06 11.47 9.27 9.36 6.07 11.01 707Student 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 1Others 3.21 2.77 0.00 0.10 0.60 0.59 0.58 0.00 0.35 1.00 64Total 810 649 279 1015 669 1020 1197 203 577 6419 6419

Annexure VII: District-wise Distribution of Occupational Classification of Children (5 to 14 years)


Delhi North North

East North West

South South West

West Total Total

Ricksha Puller 10.22 5.03 6.80 6.78 13.04 9.09 8.18 3.45 11.67 8.43 247Construction Labour 44.89 33.17 59.86 39.62 37.68 39.00 51.70 66.90 45.53 43.97 1288Coolie 1.55 0.00 0.00 1.27 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 14Begger 10.22 1.26 17.69 16.53 4.06 10.56 9.58 3.45 11.67 9.39 275Rag Picker 4.02 2.01 0.68 4.66 3.48 9.09 4.39 9.66 4.67 4.61 135 Vegetable, Fruits and Ice Cream

1.24 1.51 1.36 0.00 0.58 1.47 0.40 0.00 0.78 0.79 23

Domestic Help 1.86 7.04 2.72 3.60 3.19 2.35 2.00 2.76 1.95 3.18 93Self Employed 5.26 18.34 4.08 5.93 11.88 6.45 9.38 4.83 4.28 8.60 252Student 1.24 2.51 0.00 0.42 1.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.39 0.79 23Others 15.79 24.13 4.76 12.71 18.26 14.37 11.78 6.9 8.56 14.24 417Unemployed 3.72 5.03 2.04 8.47 6.09 6.74 2.59 2.07 10.51 5.53 162Total 323 398 147 472 345 341 501 145 257 2929 2929

Annexure VIII: District-wise Distribution of Occupational Classification: Male (5 to 14 years)


Delhi North North

East North West

South South West

West Total Total

Ricksha Puller 18.26 10.63 7.29 10.00 19.12 12.45 10.55 4.46 13.30 12.38 264 Construction Labour 46.06 35.83 61.46 42.94 37.85 40.08 55.67 68.75 48.28 46.46 991 Coolie 2.07 0.39 0.00 1.47 0.40 1.17 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.75 16 Begger 10.79 1.57 18.75 15.00 5.18 7.78 10.03 4.46 11.82 9.33 199 Rag Picker 4.98 3.15 1.04 4.71 4.38 10.51 4.75 12.50 3.45 5.34 114 Vegetable, Fruits and Ice Cream 0.83 2.36 2.08 0.00 0.40 0.78 0.26 0.00 0.99 0.75 16 Domestic Help 2.07 0.79 0.00 2.65 0.80 0.39 0.53 0.89 0.99 1.13 24 Self Employed 4.56 23.62 6.25 6.18 14.74 6.23 10.03 3.57 4.93 9.52 203 Student 1.66 2.76 0.00 0.29 2.79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.49 0.94 20 Others 0.41 5.51 0.00 0.29 2.39 0.39 1.06 1.79 0.00 1.36 29 Unemployed 8.30 13.39 3.13 16.47 11.95 20.23 7.12 3.57 15.27 12.05 257 Total 241 254 96 340 251 257 379 112 203 21332133

Annexure IX: District-wise Distribution of Occupational Classification: Female (5to 14 years)


Delhi North North

East North West

South South West

West Total Total

Ricksha Puller 6.10 4.86 7.84 2.27 9.57 3.57 9.02 6.06 9.26 6.16 49Construction Labour 58.54 48.61 62.75 40.15 47.87 44.05 50.82 72.73 48.15 49.87 397Coolie 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 1Begger 8.54 0.69 15.69 20.45 1.06 19.05 8.20 0.00 11.11 9.55 76Rag Picker 1.22 0.00 0.00 4.55 1.06 4.76 3.28 0.00 9.26 2.64 21Vegetable, Fruits and I ce Cream 2.44 0.69 0.00 0.00 1.06 3.57 0.82 0.00 0.00 1.01 8Domestic Help 1.22 18.75 7.84 6.82 11.70 8.33 9.02 9.09 7.41 9.67 77Self Employed 12.20 18.75 1.96 6.06 20.21 9.52 10.66 12.12 9.26 11.93 95Student 0.00 2.78 0.00 0.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.63 5Others 1.22 1.39 0.00 0.00 1.06 1.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.63 5Unemployed 8.54 3.47 3.92 18.18 6.38 5.95 8.20 0.00 5.56 7.79 62Total 82 144 51 132 94 84 122 33 54 796 796

Annexure X: Duration of Stay as Shelterless District Duration (years) upto 1 1-3 3-5 5-10 10+ Total (%) Total (No) Central 14.06 12.88 8.56 8.50 10.00 9.71 5425East 4.69 7.58 8.56 8.15 13.33 8.86 3781New Delhi 8.59 8.33 5.35 3.90 6.11 5.46 1647North 14.06 19.70 14.17 10.33 20.00 14.27 7305North East 13.28 15.53 14.44 15.38 12.78 14.62 4407North West 14.06 18.56 14.97 19.63 13.61 17.18 8435South 13.28 7.58 19.25 20.21 13.33 16.68 8625South West 1.56 2.27 6.68 5.63 5.28 5.06 2092West 16.41 7.58 8.02 8.27 5.56 8.16 5071Total 128 264 374 871 360 1997 46788% 6.41 13.22 18.73 43.62 18.03 100.00

DATA BASE ON SHELTERLESS PERSONS IN DELHI

District: _____________ No. Area/

Ward Name Sex Age Caste Religion Marital

Status Education Occupation State of

Origin Reason for

Leaving home Duration

Of Stay as shelterless (Months)

Changing Sleeping

Place In a year

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17