I T P I

ITPI JOURNAL
4 : 2 (2007) 01 - 07 JOURNAL
www.itpi.org.in

NINE MYTHS AND FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS: A CASE OF SEALING ILLEGAL

COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS IN DELHI

Dr. ASHOK KUMAR

Department of Physical Planning, School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi

ABSTRACT
Myths are fallacious arguments couched in indirect associations or cause and affect relationships premised on false and weak
correlations. Mythical arguments are generally based on doubtful explanations. This paper examines how fallacious arguments have
been used by government, traders and the DDA to ward off legal challenges mounted by stakeholders through courts and other
arenas. Nine myths include lack of commercial spaces, suffering of the poor traders, lack of alternative after sealing, fear of violence
and lawlessness, large scale unemployment of labor class, excessive judicial intervention of judiciary in governance, archaic building
byelaws and regulations, woes of the citizens and extent of sealing. It is contended in this paper that while sealing of illegal shops
being run from residential areas shows culpability of all citizens who have aided and abetted violations of the planning laws, there is
more to sealing than violations. The author find that one chief reason of this entire hullabaloo is to speed up and bring about so-called
urban ‘reforms’. By spreading the myths of lack of commercial spaces and inability of the DDA to develop adequate commercial spaces,
concerned agencies are attempting to discredit the DDA, which in turn is likely to prompt search for an alternative organizational
arrangement. Khanna Committee, Saigal Committee, Pradhan Committee all point to the fact that government is preparing the
ground for ‘reforms’ for the benefit of the global capital.

1 INTRODUCTION unions and traders. In order to look good in the

Sealing of illegal commercial establishments
operating from residential areas have been
extremely contentious issue of urban planning,
development and governance. Everyone is
blaming everyone else, but all must share the
blame. While unhidden nexus exists between the
politicians, builders and bureaucrats, the people
of Delhi have been equally guilty of encouraging
violations of the planning law to obtain economic
gains and social comforts. Most of the Delhites
buy properties from unscrupulous builders
knowing fully well that buildings may have been
fully or partly constructed by violating the planning
norms of ground coverage, floor area ratio, etc.
We also regularly buy goods and services from
the residential premises being illegally used for
commercial purposes. In small increments, these
twin processes have transformed the entire city
into illegally constructed and used metropolis
prompting the Chief Minister of Delhi to observe
that substantial parts of the city are unauthorized
in respect of construction and use.
Out of nagging guilt or genuine concern for better
Delhi, some individual citizens and citizen groups
have opposed illegal operations of commercial
activities from residential areas. This has been
severely opposed understandably by the traders’
eyes of the voters, the government and politicians
of all hues and colors have also opposed court
mandated sealing. But the voice of a huge majority
of citizens of Delhi seems to have been very
subdued indeed. Traders and government point
out that situation in Delhi has become very volatile.
Taking benefit of this non-existent volatility and
uncertainty, traders, politicians and so-called
intellectuals have been busy in planting myths and
spreading rumors. This paper looks at a number
of these prominent myths, which are dangerously
becoming part of the accepted discourse on
governance and urban planning.
2 NINE MYTHS AND FALLACIOUS
ARGUMENTS
2.1 Sufferings of the Poor Traders
More than 1,700 government recognized schools
have been operating from unauthorized premises.
Nearly 200 Delhi Government’s liquor shops have
been shut as these were operating from
unauthorized areas. The office of the Telecom
Regulatory Authority of India was sealed by the
MCD. Pointing out inherent contradictions
between the regulatory functions of the TRAI, and
its office operating from rented illegal premises,
the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India
 Dr. Ashok Kumar / ITPI Journal 4 : 2 (2007) 01 - 07
Y.K. Sabharwal aguishly noted that ‘If the
authority is not going to regulate themselves,
whom are they going to regulate’. The offices of
the Associated Chambers of Commerce and
Industry (ASSOCHAM), Indian Institute of Planning
and Management, US based NGO, CTC Plaza,
Thapar Business Centre, Bata showroom, Haldiram,
Pulse-Impulse fitness center, Yamaha showroom,
IGP Mall, Regency Guest House, Sita Play School,
Shehnaz Hussain Beauty Products Shop were also
sealed among scores of other prominent private
shops being run from unauthorized premises.
These and others are not poor traders by any
stretch of imagination. What is clear is the fact
that both public agencies and private companies
are operating from illegal premises. At the same
time a number of patty traders are also operating
from low income residential areas. Complete
picture can emerge only after a census is
conducted of the commercial operations in the
city.
Instead of securing authentic data about extent
and nature of commercial development in Delhi,
the traders have been busy in propagating
fallacious arguments about sealing and its
outcomes. They have tried all tricks of the trade
to subvert the law but due to persistent efforts of
the honorable Supreme Court of India, the traders
could achieve nothing illegitimate. However, what
went unacknowledged was the fact that the court
has given relief to a large number of traders
operating from comparatively poor areas by
staying only a part of the law and subsequent
notification issued by the government. Large-scale
showroom owners possibly could not be classified
as poor traders. Some of these include branded
manufacturers of clothes, car showrooms, etc. It
is preposterous to say that otherwise respectable
fashion designers should be clubbed together with
poor retail traders operating from poor colonies,
although even such unplanned mixing of land uses
could adversely affect the physical environment
in these areas.
2.2 No Alternative Exists After Sealing
Illegitimate uproar on the streets and in some
sections of the media has created an artificial crisis
in Delhi. Traders, Government of the National
Capital Territory of Delhi, Delhi Municipal
2
Corporation and the Ministry of Urban
Development, Government of India have been
unanimously pointing out that there is no
alternative after sealing of illegal shops. It goes
without saying that there is no alternative to
regularization of illegal shops being run from
residential premises. This is a complete and
absolute myth.
A survey by Resident Welfare Associations has
shown that over 6,000 shops are lying vacant in
Delhi. DDA’s internal report mentions that over
4,000 shops are ready for auction and more could
be made available by January 2007. Thus
alternative shops could be made available to
traders in the district centers of DDA, where they
could also enjoy economies of scale due to large
turnovers as well as location advantages of
accessibility and to an extent centrality in respect
of a larger geographical area equivalent to a
planning zone or zones. However, only large
traders are likely to benefit more from this kind of
relocation policy. But under all circumstances,
traders must be asked to pay entire price of a
shop and no subsidy should be offered as they
have willfully violated the law. For other traders,
shops could be found in the malls constructed by
the private builders. It may be appropriate here
to note that since malls do not find a mention in
the Master Plan for Delhi, 2001, strictly speaking
these could be also construed as illegal.
Nonetheless, there are a large number of shops
constructed in the legally designated commercial
areas; the number, locations, sizes and prices of
which could be ascertained and offers could be
made to traders within a strict timeframe.
Therefore, there are alternative locations, which
could be offered to traders for carrying out
legitimate economic activities from authorized
locations. For example almost half of the Janakpuri
District Center is still lying vacant and similarly a
large number of shops still are not occupied by
anyone in the Sonia Mall and Rajouri Garden Mall,
both located in western Delhi. Similarly other parts
of Delhi may have unoccupied commercial shops.
But major reasons for not purchasing legal shops
from the DDA are that prices of shops are
skyrocketing and the entire amount of money
has to be paid as, what is cynically called, ‘white
 Dr. Ashok Kumar / ITPI Journal 4 : 2 (2007) 01 - 07
money’ inviting wrath of the income tax authorities
if it is unaccounted black money. In any case,
solutions have to be found out by regulating land
and real estate markets for transparent and hassle
free real estate transactions, and not by
regularizing existing illegal shops being run from
residential areas.
Even if it is found after conducting a primary
survey that adequate number of shops are not
available, this should be used as an opportunity
by the authorities as well as the traders to set
right violations of the planning law leading to a
better planned city. Good news is that after
exhausting almost all options, even traders and
their representatives are now beginning to air
views about possible alternatives, perhaps a result
of the sustained campaign by the authorities,
under pressure from judiciary, to bring about
erring traders within the framework of planning
law. Whatever may happen to sealing in 2007, it
could be reasonably established that there are
alternatives to illegal use of premises by traders.
2.3 Fear of Violence and Lawlessness
It is being argued that Delhi will come to a standstill
and authorities might have to handle worsening
law and order situation. Some sections of the media
continue to create an environment of fear and
violence. Even law enforcement agencies of state
and central government seem to give the
impression that to continue with sealing could
cause lawlessness. But in any civilized society
democratic rights are not unfettered. Traders
being citizens must work within the reasonable
restrictions imposed by the Constitution and
statutes enacted by central and state
governments. They cannot hold the government
to ransom with the threat of violence.
However, when sealing started, there was some
impact of strikes by traders on Delhi. The first
bandh was called on 11 May, 2006 and the
second on 20 September, 2006. The third three-
day bandh was called on 30 October, 2006. During
this strike call Delhi’s traders completely shut shop
for three days causing large-scale inconvenience
to the public in general. However, unfortunately
on 20 September, 2006 during the second bandh,
three people lost their lives during protests in
3
northeastern Delhi’s Seelampur in police firing. But
7 November, 2006 saw the last one-day bandh
without any significant untoward incident. But
during this last bandh, a large number of small
shop owners did open their shops due to
economic considerations. This happened, as poor
traders particularly could not afford to shut shop.
So they opened their shops to the relief of citizens
and Government of the National Capital Territory
of Delhi.
But under pressure from traders, government
continued to approach the court for relief. On one
such occasion, on 6, November 2006, Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court of India reacting to
applications seeking relief for traders came heavily
on the government. ‘You cannot say we govern
the country, but cannot implement your orders
because there will be law and order problem. You
think that 25,000 people by putting a dagger on
the throat of someone can seek such discretionary
relief, hold the entire city to ransom … and the
government is helpless’. Law abiding citizens could
not agree more with the sentiment of the court.
Nonetheless, doomsayers have been proven
wrong. Although even a single life lost is tragic
and unfortunate, false predictions of large-scale
violence remained unfounded. Leaving aside
violence in Seelampur and only few other areas,
largely Delhi remained and remains peaceful during
and after the strikes. After all perseverance of the
law enforcement agencies under pressure from
judiciary has paid off.
2.4 Large Scale Unemployment
Another myth being propagated is that if sealing
orders are fully implemented; a large number of
workers employed by the traders will become
unemployed. Let us examine facts. According to
the Economic Survey of Delhi, there are 2,30,000
retail enterprises which employ 5,40,000 persons
in trade, commerce and allied services
(Government of the National Capital Territory of
Delhi (2002). This means on average each
enterprise employs 2.5 workers. At present, there
are 44,000 shops, which the court has ordered
for sealing. These 44,000 shops could employ
1,10,000 workers at the rate of 2.5 workers per
shop. This means sealing action will affect only one
 Dr. Ashok Kumar / ITPI Journal 4 : 2 (2007) 01 - 07
fifth of the workers notwithstanding devastating
impact on those concerned retail workers.
Assuming that 4,000 shops built by government
agencies and private builders are available for
allotment to the traders immediately, only another
40,000 traders require relocation and
rehabilitation. Sustained and time bound efforts
by authorities could even successfully relocate
remaining 40,000 enterprises by the end of 2007.
But government seems to be on the side of the
violators of the planning and other laws.
Apart from private traders, for example, there is
another public agency in the commercial
development scenario of Delhi. Delhi Metro has
developed commercial areas in some stations and
vows to do the same in others stations. On each
station it proposes to develop 3 hectare of
commercial space. If this proposal is implemented,
Delhi will have additional commercial space
equivalent to 750 hectare.
Going by the existing trend of development, Delhi
Metro will develop 750 hectares of malls in addition
to what is being proposed by the Master Plan for
Delhi. Few malls have been completed so far. Large
builders have developed all of these malls, and
shops and showrooms are taken up by large
businesses. A proposal to allocate some of these
spaces to patty traders, who were displaced by
the Metro project, was turned down. But here is
another opportunity to allot these spaces to small
traders. But a word of caution, even land use
change permissions and building permissions are
not secured by the DMRC from the DDA and MCD.
Skirmishes are already going on between the MCD
and DMRC whereby MCD has said that these
developments have violated the planning norms
and policies. However, DDA has not said much.
Nonetheless, ponder over this question. What if
all traders were affected by the sealing drive,
should not the rule of law be enforced? This is a
question for the executive, which is responsible
for good governance. Pending MCD elections,
where the Congress defeat seems to be the likely
outcome, the Government of the National Capital
Territory of Delhi and the Ministry of Urban
Development continue to accentuate the myth
of large scale economic disruption.
4
2.5 Non-impelementation by the DDA
Everyone is shouting at the urban planners, who
they say, must be punished for non-
implementation of the master plan. It is stated that
have the planners implemented the master plan,
the traders will not be facing these problems in
the first place. This is also largely a myth created
by those who do not want to see urban planning
and planners’ influence on the planned
development of Delhi. Let me illustrate this point.
First of all implementation of the Master Plan for
Delhi is a collective responsibility of a number of
agencies including the DDA, DMC and Ministry of
Urban Development apart from the Government
of the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Similarly,
implementation of the Master Plan for Delhi is also
the collective responsibility of large number of
engineers, architects, bureaucrats and also a small
and less powerful DDA and DMC urban planners.
However, urban planners do have much greater
responsibility in preparing the Master Plan, which
has been delayed each time by at least five years
from the time previous plan exhausted its
perspective period. The planners must not
abdicate this responsibility, which has obviously
contributed to delay in implementation of planning
policies in the fast changing global market place.
This however in any way does not imply that
traders have the license to violate the existing
Master Plan and other rules and regulations
pertaining to physical development of the city.
Let us have another take on the issue of non-
implementation, which is about facts. But facts
are hard to come by in the form of reliable data.
This kind of argumentation was started by the
Khanna Committee, which submitted its report
on 13th May, 2006. In chapter three at point 3.5
of this report, it is noted that ‘since DDA started
its activities, it has only been able to provide 16
percent of the targeted built up area designated
for commercial purposes’ (Ministry of Urban
Development, 2006: 9 and also see page 31).
But this is only area covered by the district centers,
which of course forms nearly 47 percent of the
entire commercial area as per 2005 draft of the
Delhi Master Plan. For five lakh population, 40
hectare is the norm. Calculated for the population
of five lakh for Community Centers would cover
 Dr. Ashok Kumar / ITPI Journal 4 : 2 (2007) 01 - 07
20 hectare at the rate of 4 hectare per lakh
population, Local Shopping Centers will have 15
hectare at the rate of 0.3 hectare for 10,000
population, and Convenience Shopping Centers
will have 10 hectare for five lakh population at the
rate of 0.1 hectare after every 5,000 people (Delhi
Development Authority (2005: 288). This makes
the ratio between District Commercial Center and
other tiers of commercial developments as 40:45
in terms of area. More accurate indicator is the
number of shops. In terms of number of shops,
the ratio between district commercial center on
one hand and community shopping center and
local shopping center and convenience shopping
center on the other is 20:80. This ratio is 60:50 in
terms of floor space.
It is unofficially reported by the planners of the
DDA that 70 percent of community centers, local
shopping centers and convenience shopping
centers have been constructed. Assuming all the
backlog remains at the level of community centers
and district centers, it is hard to believe that the
DDA has been able to provide only 16 percent of
the total planned commercial space. More realistic
figure of constructed commercial space could be
nearly 50 percent. But actual figures must be
made available by the DDA to effectively deal with
compounding myths. It is also inaccurate, as
reported in the media that only 3 district
commercial centers are constructed because 11
out of 29 district centers have been constructed
and others are being completed. Only authentic
information collected by credible organizations and
individual researchers could handle increasing
incidents of myth making as the basis for policy
changes.
2.6 Excessive Judicial Interventions in
Governance
Intellectuals have been harping upon the fact that
judiciary has crossed limits in a democratic set up.
It is argued that interventions in the sealing are a
fit case of excessive intervention by the judiciary
in matters of governance by the executive. That
may be so, but what to do in a situation when the
democratic state itself slacks in taking action
against the offenders. For example sealing of
residential premises for misuse is more than 20
5
year old (I.A. No.22 etc. in W.P. (Civil) No.4677/
1985) and no action has been taken.
Not only that what to do in a situation when the
state actively participates in the process of coming
around the existing law by responding with new
laws just to turnover the judgments of the courts.
In the name of ground realities, Government of
India has passed Delhi Laws (Special Provisions)
Act, 2006 to provide moratorium from sealing for
one year. Courts have simply done their job by
interpreting the existing law enacted (Delhi
Development Act, 1957) by the Parliament.
Implementation of the law is the responsibility of
the executive, which was not upheld by the
government for nearly 50 years. Who is to blame,
the judiciary or the government’? Let the public
decide.
Notification of 7 September, 2006 amending the
Master Plan for Delhi, 2001 and Delhi
Government’s notification of 15 September 2006
clearing 2,183 roads for mixed land use are largely
based on the Khanna Committee’s
recommendations. If one closely observes, one
will find out that most of the Khanna Committee
recommendations are based on the explicit
objective of providing scour to the violators of
the rule of law. The Committee provides two main
excuses to condone violators, consider them. ‘If
any set of regulations result in a majority of people
being categorized as violators/offenders, the
regulations themselves need to be carefully
reviewed, rather than being regarded as inviolable
and cast in stone (Ministry of Urban Development,
2006: 5). The Committee insists that ‘If planning
exercises leave large gaps relative to the actual
needs of the people by way of residential,
commercial and institutional areas, etc., and then
no effective institutional mechanisms are provided
to bridge such gaps, the people can not be held
entirely responsible for adopting rough and ready
solutions’ (Ministry of Urban Development, 2006:
6). If we have a substantial majority of the people
violating the law, should we dispense with the law
itself? If the DDA remains unable to implement its
policies, should we allow people to violate the law
to purse economic activities? These are issues of
effective governance whereby government
should look for ways to make existing
 Dr. Ashok Kumar / ITPI Journal 4 : 2 (2007) 01 - 07
organizations more effective to do the planning
jobs.
2.7 Woes of the Citizens of Delhi
Woes of Delhites never end. People buy houses
for comfort and to live in peaceful environments.
But peace is shattered when one experiences all
sorts of shops being run from residential areas.
Shops remain open during late hours and create
extreme disturbance in the form of air and noise
pollution. Another problem is that since a large
number of people come for shopping in these
shops, parking overspills to the entire residential
area. Residents find difficult to park their own
vehicles. The list is endless. These arguments are
repeatedly made by the representatives of the
resident welfare associations in the city.
People of Delhi are complaining that traders are
heartless. Even doctors have joined them and shut
the shop. That may be so, but the citizens must
also answer some difficult and soul-searching
questions. Who are the users of goods and
services being provided by the traders from these
illegal premises? We have all purchased goods
from a showroom selling television, video and other
electronics gizmos. We have all went to up-market
mobile shop to buy a mobile. We have all been
using valuable services being provided by them
knowing fully well that traders are operating from
illegal premises. We are all in the habit of
abandoning laws for greater and greater material
comforts. Therefore, it is a myth that citizens have
been suffering due to illegal operations of the
traders. Like others, citizens of Delhi are also
culpable because of their participation as clienteles
to these illegal shops.
2.8 Archaic Building Byelaws and
Regulations
Almost at the every possible opportunity that she
gets of public speaking, the Chief Minister of Delhi
repeatedly points out that planning and building
byelaws and regulations are archaic. On 24
November, 2006 speaking at the Urban
Governance national seminar organized by
Association of Municipalities and Development
Authorities, the honorable Chief Minister of Delhi
again said that rules and regulations related to
6
physical development are archaic. Similar points
were made to the media on 27 November, 2006.
What she meant was that there were lots of
unnecessary building control rules and regulations,
which perpetuate corruption in local bodies leading
to delays in arriving at decisions. But this is less to
do with officialdom and more to do with the elected
representatives who are, at least in theory,
supposed to bring bureaucrats to account for
their public actions.
Another important question is that who is
responsible for framing the building byelaws for
Delhi? According to Chapter XVI, the central
government is responsible for framing building
byelaws. However, this is done in consultation with
the state government, MCD, NDMC and DDA,
among others. If it is viewed that building byelaws
are cumbersome, the state government could
have raised objections and made suggestions
during the formulation of byelaws. Nonetheless,
on balance building byelaws are not complicated
for a law-abiding citizen. All byelaws are available
openly to anyone wanting to construct a building.
Separate performa are required to be filled up
during different stages of building construction and
completion. In any case, similar and even more
restrictive regimes of building rules and regulations
are being followed in the economically advancing
and advanced countries with a reasonable
measure of success. Rules and regulations can be
implemented only if the elected representatives
are provided enough incentives for reelection on
implementation of the rule of law. Voters must
devise ways to award those politicians who work
for the implementation of rule of law rather than
those who rule by fiat.
2.9 Sealing of Illegal Operations and
Premises
MCD has sealed 1,822 premises after it resumed
sealing on 8 November, 2006. Let us assume, as
data is not available, that it had sealed another
2,000 shops prior to resumption of sealing on 8
November, 2006. In addition to this more than
18,000 traders have filed affidavits by 19
November, 2006.
On the other hand, government through its
notification of 15 September, 2006 has already
 Dr. Ashok Kumar / ITPI Journal 4 : 2 (2007) 01 - 07
granted reprieve to a majority of the traders
operating from C, D, E, F and G colonies. As a
consequence, commercial activities will be allowed
to continue on nearly 2,200 roads till the Supreme
Court of India takes a final view on the legality of
notifications. Of the notified 2,183 roads, 734
roads have been declared fully commercial, 685
mixed land use roads and remaining as pedestrian
shopping areas. This means only large commercial
establishments operating from upscale A and B
residential colonies will be facing sealing. But this
notification excluded 44,000 traders who filed
affidavits in the Court assuring that they would
move their shops from residential areas by 31
October, 2006. Even these traders have now got
reprieve from the Supreme Court till 31 January,
2007.
This kind of sealing drive is going nowhere. A
majority of the illegal shops continue to operate
from illegal premises. This is the myth of sealing.
3 CONCLUSIONS
While sealing of illegal shops being run from
residential areas shows culpability of all citizens who
have aided and abetted violations of the planning
laws, there is more to sealing than violations. I
find that one chief reason of this entire hullabaloo
is to speed up and bring about so-called urban
‘reforms’. By spreading the myths of lack of
commercial spaces and inability of the DDA to
develop adequate commercial spaces, concerned
agencies are attempting to discredit the DDA,
which in turn is likely to prompt search for an
alternative organizational arrangement. Khanna
Committee, Saigal Committee, Pradhan
Committee all point to the fact that government
is preparing the ground for ‘reforms’ for the
benefit of the global capital. Looking for new
organizations is not a bad idea in itself, but looking
for new organizations without giving a chance of
improvement to the existing organizations
certainly is one.
To strengthen their case, confusion and chaos
are being used as weapons to perpetuate
lawlessness and violations of the rule of law.
Confusion has been created in the minds of all
law-abiding citizens and those traders who are
willing to follow the rule of law by relocating their
shops. New laws such as Delhi Laws (Special
Provisions) Act, 2006 and subsequent notifications
are being passed by the government in clear
violation of the existing laws only to compound
confusion. This situation compelled the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court on 17 July, 2006 to
observe that ‘the legislature can not direct any
authority not to comply with the orders of this
court’. Reacting to notifications, Chief Justice Y.K.
Sabharwal on 18 September, 2006 also observed
that the last minute notifications are causing utter
confusion and chaos to the citizens. An impression
is given as if judiciary is on one side and
government on the other’. While the Court is
examining the validity of Delhi Laws (Special
Provisions) Act, 2006 and notifications, new roads
are being notified by the MCD for mixed land use,
effectively regularizing new areas for commercial
development. In such situations, there is a lot of
pressure to abandon the law altogether. For
example, demands for placing the Delhi Laws
(Special Provisions) Act, 2006 in Schedule IX of
the Constitution of India and making it non-
justiciable would be the final attempt at condoning
unlawful economic activities being operated from
unlawful use of premises.
REFERENCES
Delhi Development Authority (2005) Draft Master Plan for Delhi,
Perspective 2021, Government of India Press, New Delhi.
Government of India (2006) The Delhi Laws (Special Provisions)
Act, 2006, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India,
New Delhi.
Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (2002)
The Economic Survey of Delhi, 2001-2002, Government of the
National Capital Territory of Delhi, New Delhi.
Ministry of Urban Development (2006) Report of the Tejendra
Khanna Committee of Experts, Ministry of Urban Development,
Government of India, New Delhi.