In a landmark ruling, the Karnataka High Court has directed that slum dwellers displaced from areas near the Kalikamba Temple in Mandya be rehabilitated immediately. The decision clears the way for long-awaited relief, recognizing decades of notifications and the constitutional rights of those affected.
Background: A Decades-Old Notification
In May 1979, the government issued a notification declaring that slum dwellers living in slum zones existing in Mandya City at that time be rehabilitated. Authorities had recognized their dwellings and their need for formal relocation or redevelopment.
Over the years, those residents have been living under uncertain conditions, often without basic infrastructure, secure tenure, or legal clarity. Many were displaced or threatened with eviction, but formal rehabilitation remained elusive.
What the Court Has Directed
The Karnataka High Court has now stepped in, ordering the government to immediately rehabilitate those slum dwellers living near the Kalikamba Temple who were displaced.
The ruling emphasizes that the 1979 notification obligates the state to act: slum dwellers who were recognized then should not be left without shelter or legal recognition today.
Implications for the Displaced Residents
For many families, this decision means hope for relief from precarious housing, lack of sanitation, insecure tenure, and threats of further displacement.
Rehabilitation may include relocation to better housing, provision of essential services (water, sanitation, electricity), and legal recognition of their status.
The delay of over four decades has meant multiple generations living without formal address or stability. This order could bring a measure of justice and security.
What Happens Next: Implementation and Challenges
The court’s directive places an immediate mandate on the relevant state authorities (local government, housing boards, etc.) to formulate and execute a rehabilitation plan.
The authorities will need to identify suitable land, budget allocations, infrastructure development, housing design, and relocation logistics.
Challenges likely include finding land close enough to maintain proximity to livelihoods and community networks, addressing financial costs, managing expectations of affected people, and ensuring transparent, inclusive processes.
Legal & Social Significance
This case highlights how legal recognition (via notifications or other instruments) has real implications decades later. When the government formally recognizes slum dwellers, it creates obligations that courts can enforce.
It also underscores the rights of urban poor under constitutional guarantees, particularly right to life with dignity, shelter, and basic amenities.
Socially, the decision affirms that citizens who have long contributed as informal city dwellers must not be invisibilized or left outside the law.
Wider Context: Slum Rehabilitation in India
Across India, slum rehabilitation has been a persistent issue: urbanization, migration, and housing shortages mean many live without formal housing or rights.
Legal battles often arise around evictions without rehabilitation, delays in government action, unclear tenure, lack of infrastructure, and policy disconnects between what is promised and what is delivered.
Successful rehabilitation typically involves coordination among government agencies, civil society, and affected communities, and often requires political will, resources, and legal clarity.
Outlook: What Needs to Be Ensured
To make this High Court mandate meaningful rather than symbolic, several things need attention:
Speed and Accountability: Authorities must move quickly, set deadlines, and publicly share plans for relocation, housing, and amenities.
Participation of Affected Communities: Those displaced should have a say in where and how they are rehabilitated—housing design, location, services, access to transport and livelihoods matter.
Maintenance of Dignity: Rehabilitation must ensure not just roof and walls, but basic sanitation, safety, access to schools, health care, etc.
Legal Security: Formal documentation, clear tenure rights, and address records are crucial so people are not again vulnerable to eviction or loss of recognition.
Budgetary Commitment: It will require sufficient funds from municipal, state or central schemes to be allocated and protected.
Conclusion
The Karnataka High Court’s order in favor of rehabilitating displaced slum dwellers near Kalikamba Temple in Mandya marks a significant moment of justice. It reaffirms that past legal recognition (like notifications) imposes present obligations, and that displacement without remedy cannot continue unchecked.
For the residents, this could mean a chance at stable shelter, dignity, and security long denied. But whether the order leads to real change depends on implementation: inclusive planning, adequate resources, and political will. If done well, it could set a precedent for how displaced slum populations are treated elsewhere in India.
Our Services – FACTS Transcripts
We at FACTS Transcripts assist in various services, including:
Mark Sheet Transcripts
E-Transcripts
Duplicate Mark Sheets & Degree Certificates
Medium of Instructions Certificates
Attestations
HRD Attestation / Apostille Services
ECA (Educational Credentials Assessment)
Trusted by leading global verification organizations, including WES, IQAS, PEBC, NDEB, NASBA, CAPR, NZQA, ICAS, NCESS, ICES, ECE, eduPASS, ACEI, GCEUS, Comparative Education Services, NNAS, NCA, SAQA, QMAS, FORAC, Australian Pharmacy Council, and more.
FACTS Transcripts – The preferred choice for university document verification worldwide. We ensure a hassle-free process for obtaining your transcripts.
