Persistent encroachment on public land shows weaknesses in urban local governance in India. Discuss, and suggest a framework that balances project needs with the rights of the urban poor.

The 74th Amendment makes urban local bodies (ULBs) responsible for land use and urban planning. Yet in November 2026 the Supreme Court had to threaten to freeze the salaries of BMC officials before encroachments on land reserved for a BEST bus stand were cleared within a day [1]. Encroachment that persists is a failure of governance, not only of law and order.

Weaknesses in urban local governance

• Compliance only under pressure: BMC asked for more time despite earlier SC orders and acted only when officials' own pay was at risk [1].
• Collusion: The Bench suspected collusion between officials and encroachers, a local case of regulatory capture [1].
• No personal accountability: In Delhi, the SC had to make municipal commissioners personally responsible for keeping public land free, warning of perjury and contempt [2]. DDA officials who defied SC orders got only departmental proceedings [3].
• Weak land records: The SC held that simply claiming land is an encroachment is not enough; it must be proved [4]. Many ULBs lack surveyed, digitised registers of their land.
• Haste over due process: BMC reported structures "erased" in a day, with no record of notice or rehabilitation [1]. Meanwhile, public-transport projects stay stuck for years.

Framework: balancing project needs and rights

Survey & record → Notice & hearing → Rehabilitation plan → Clearance → Project
       ↑________ named officer accountable at every stage ________↑

Fig: Sequence for clearing land without leaving people homeless

• Prevention: a geo-tagged public-land registry, with a named officer per plot, from ward officer up to Commissioner [2].
• Verification: survey the occupants and establish the encroachment before acting [4].
• Due process: show-cause notice, a hearing and a reasoned order, following the SC's 2024 demolition guidelines. These also make officials personally liable for illegal demolition [5].
• Rehabilitation: treat eviction as a last resort, assess the impact first and leave no one homeless, as the UN eviction guidelines require [6]. Link eligible occupants to PMAY-Urban or in-situ redevelopment.
• Accountability: treat collusion as misconduct and finish departmental proceedings within a fixed deadline [3].

Encroachment persists because ULBs lack accountability, reliable records and housing alternatives, which leaves the courts to enforce the law. A survey-notify-rehabilitate-clear sequence, owned by named officials, would deliver public projects such as bus stands without displacing the urban poor unfairly. This fits the 74th Amendment's idea of accountable local government and SDG 11 on inclusive cities.