The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi

SELINA ABRAHAM

The Heterotopic Space

of Chirag Delhi B. ARCH DISSERTATION 2012-2013 Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Kashmere Gate, New Delhi

Image Source: Author (2010), Chirag Delhi

B. ARCH DISSERTATION 2012-2013

The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi ii

UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING

Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University

Kashmere Gate, Delhi

RESEARCH PAPER, 2012-13

THE HETEROTOPIC SPACE OF CHIRAG DELHI

A Study of an Urban Village

Selina Abraham

00890701609

Fourth Year, 2012-2013

GUIDE

Rekha Bhaskaran


The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi iii

UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND

PLANNING

Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University

Kashmere Gate, Delhi

APPROVAL

Research Paper title: The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi: A Study of an Urban

Village

The following study is held by approved as a creditable work on the approved subject,

carried out and presented in a manner sufficiently satisfactory to warrant its acceptance as a

pre-requisite to the degree for which it has been submitted.

It is to be understood that by this approval, the undersigned does not necessarily endorse

or approve any statement made, opinion expressed or conclusion drawn therein, but approves

the study for the purpose of which it is submitted and which satisfies the requirements laid

down by the Research Paper Committee.

Date: January 2nd

, 2013

Submitted by:

Selina Abraham

00890701609

2012-2013

Guide: Rekha Bhaskaran Research Paper Co-ordinators


The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi iv

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S

A lot of thought and work has gone into this dissertation and would have not been

possible without the input of many persons and the availability of certain resources.

The following have been instrumental in this dissertation:

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my guide Prof. Rekha Bhaskaran for

her inputs and the discussions that we had have been quintessential for the development

process.

I would like also to thank Prof. Archana Gupta for many reasons, firstly for

introducing the urban village of Chirag Delhi into my coursework and for introducing me to

the works of Michel Foucault and Henri Lefebvre. Also for her constant encouragement and

support without whom this dissertation would not have been possible.

I would also like to thank Prof. Rajiv Bhakat for the wealth of information that he had

to offer, his insight has been of great help. Discussions with him have been highly thought

provoking and enlightening.

In addition I would also like to thank my college USAP and the Prof-in-charge Rajat

Ray for giving me the opportunity to undertake this research project. I would also like to

thank Dr. Suptendu P. Biswas for his initial encouragement to continue the topic.

I would also like to thank the residents of Chirag Delhi for their enthusiasm and their

willingness to help my dissertation with their cooperation, this paper would not have been

possible without them.

Also, I would like to thank former Architecture students of TVB School of Habitat

Studies, School of Planning and Architecture (New Delhi) and the London Metropolitan

University whose work on Chirag Delhi and Urban Villages provided as a base for my study.

The work done by the INTACH in this field has also been crucial as the base for this

dissertation.

I would also like to mention the coordinator Prof. Taniya Sanyal for her role in this

studio.

And most importantly I would like to thank my family and friends for their support

and guidance.


The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi v

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S

APPROVAL

ACKNOWLEGEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

1 ABSTRACT

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Overview

2.2 Research Questions

2.3 Background and Significance

2.4 Site Justification

2.5 Methodology

2.6 Limitations of Study

2.7 Preliminary Findings

3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

3.1 Heterotopias – ‘Other’ Spaces

3.1.1 The Origins of Heterotopias

3.1.2 Heterotopias in Social Space

3.2 Third Wave

3.2.1 The Three Waves

3.2.2 Chirag Delhi: A Clash of Waves

4 Chirag Delhi: The Lal Dora Effect

4.1 ‘Urban Village’

4.2Inverted Character

5 Physical Morphology

5.1 The Settlement

5.2 The Street and the Chowk

5.3 The Dargah

6 Social Morphology

7 Conclusion

Annotated Bibliography

APPENDIX-A APPENDIX-B

References and Bibliography


The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi vi

L I S T O F F I G U R E S

Fig 1. Relationship between Chirag Delhi and the city of New Delhi

Fig 2. Chirag Delhi and its Surroundings

Fig 3. Representation Diagram of the Expansion of Urban Limits

Fig 4. Chirag Delhi: Urban Morphology

Fig 5. Saomi Nagar: Neighbourhood Study

Fig 6. Chirag Delhi: Street Morphology

Fig 7. Saomi Nagar: Street Morphology

Fig 8. Chirag Delhi: Past Introverted Character

Fig 9. Chirag Delhi: Present Extroverted Character

Fig 10. Transformation of Landuse and Physical Morphology

Fig 11. Section through Main Village Chowk

Fig 12. Section through Main Bazaar, Chirag Delhi

Fig 13. The Dargah of Sheikh Naseeruddin Chirag-i-Dilli, Plan, Section

Fig 14. Chirag Delhi Dargah

Fig 15. The Streets of Chirag Delhi

Fig 16. Unemployment: Playing Cards

Fig 17. Chirag Delhi: Land Use Distribution main axes

The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi

A B S T R A C T

In the last few decades, the cityscape has been transformed by modern

urban needs drastically changing city’s urban form. Delhi has witnessed rapid

urbanisation that has resulted in an urban sprawl. This dissertation proposes

to study the urban morphology of an urban village – with reference to its

heterotopic character with respect to the rest of the city. In order to study

this heterotopic phenomenon, the urban village of Chirag Delhi has been

chosen as the object of this case study. Chirag Delhi is an urban village in

Delhi’s South District. Like most urban villages it is seemingly chaotic and

vaguely organic but at the same time intricately structured in its own right.

The dissertation will primarily use the framework of Michel Foucault’s Other

Places to understand the concept of Heterotopias. The dissertation will also

study impact of Chirag Delhi’s Heterotopic character on its social structure

and how it differs from the mainstream city. It also aims to study the relation

between the physical structure and the social structure of Chirag Delhi.

Further, it will address role of the Dargah as a Heterotopic space in Chirag

Delhi.


The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi 1

O V E R V I E W

“Space is a social morphology: it is to lived experience what form itself is to the

living organism, and just as intimately bound up with function and structure”.

(Lefebvre, 1991:94)

Chirag Delhi is an Urban Village, one of 135 such settlements in Delhi. Some may

understand ‘Urban Villages’ as an urban design concept in the late 1980s, born in Britain

under the late Urban Villages group.1 In Delhi however, urban villages are a phenomenon, a

product of rapid urbanisation marked by a large increase in population. (Refer Appendix - A)

Since India’s Independence in 1947, Delhi has been expanding its boundaries and has

engulfed smaller adjoining villages into its territories, thereby transforming rural areas into

urban areas. As a result these villages are forced to adapt to urban needs and have undergone

rapid transformation. This has resulted in an uncontrolled invasion of non-compatible land-

uses and elimination of traditional interrelationships by external superfluous forces leading to

the disintegration of the community. Without proper development controls, the village is

subjected to speculative development.

(Agarwal 2003)

Modern city planning may be seen as an attempt at 'expressing a series of utopias'

which aims at providing order to society through ambiguous spatial arrangements.

Heterotopias on the other hand are spaces of alternate ordering. Heterotopias organize their

social world in a different way as compared to what surrounds them. (Hetherington 1997)

1 It was in the late 1980s that the Urban Village Concept was born in Britain with the establishment of the

Urban Villages Group. Ever since the ideals of urban villages have been applied to new fields of green

developments, housing experiments and urban renewal projects all over the world. According to this, an

urban village is an urban planning and design concept at work within the urban limits. It refers to a planned

space in an urban area which has certain characteristics of a village, with typical features like mixed use

zoning and good public transit and promote pedestrianization. It seeks to reduce to car reliance and

promotes walking, cycling, transit use and provide spaces for people to live, work and recreate in the same

area.

Source: Gangmei G (2009) “Delhi Urban Villages: Reality or Gem of a Sham”, M.A. Students of Journalism,

Jamia Milia Islamia, Fotonix, Blogspot, New Delhi

Available From: http://fotonix.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/delhi-urban-village-reality-or-gem-of-a-sham/

[Accessed 18 December 2012]

http://fotonix.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/delhi-urban-village-reality-or-gem-of-a-sham/



As Delhi grew in importance, its boundaries expanded and new residential areas

sprung up, simultaneously leaving behind pockets of difference in the form of ‘urban villages’

and ‘abadi’ areas.

Amongst a series of modern spatial arrangements, Chirag Delhi is the other space -

characterized by difference. This spatial difference is marked by the physical morphology of

the city and the social structure. As an urban village, rent is cheap in Chirag Delhi, making it

favourable for new immigrants. This property allows it to stand out against the less affordable

communities of Panchscheel Enclave, Malviya Nagar and Saomi Nagar. The unique character

of Chirag Delhi's social spaces stems from this heterotopic difference.

(Refer Appendix B)

As with all of the city’s urban villages, Chirag Delhi remains physically isolated from the rest

of the city (by a buffer area called the phirni) but integrated to the city’s functions. This

character is comparable to what Foucault calls heterotopic spaces - as in it shares

relationships with the rest of the city but remains in isolation. Despite this difference it

maintains a symbiotic relationship with the rest of the city.

This dissertation aims to

understand the difference

of Chirag Delhi and establish

its heterotopic character. It

also aims to understand the

impact of this heterotopic

space on the social

morphology of the

settlement. This dissertation

will further explore

Foucault’s framework by the

study of this phenomenon.

Fig. 1 A Representative

Diagram of the Relationship

between Chirag Delhi and the

city of New Delhi

Image Source: Author (2012),

New Delhi



R E S E A R C H Q U E S T I O N S

- What are Heterotopic Spaces and what makes Chirag Delhi a heterotopic space?

- How does this heterotopic character affect the social space of Chirag Delhi and the rest of

the city?

- What is the spatial relationship between Chirag Delhi and the city of Delhi? How is space

socially produced in the Chirag Delhi? What are the signifying elements that constitute a

socially active space?

- What role does the Dargah play in this heterotopic character?

B A C K G R O U N D A N D S I G N I F I C A N C E

Topic Significance

Most of Modernist architecture has been criticized for being independent of its

context. The last few decades have seen a series of buildings that stand alone, each choosing

out of convenience to disassociate itself from the urban context. Modernist cities have reduced

the concept of typology to repetition. Settlements like Chirag Delhi create more organic space

and respond primarily to a social need as opposed to a functional need. They belong to a

different era, built according to different needs and requirements.

"The fundamental purposes of modern architecture are thus

limited to such right quadrant concerns as shelter, security, function and

so on − all of them important, but not enough for a truly sustainable

architecture because they ignore what sustains us psychologically and

culturally." (Buchanen 2011)

Similarly Modern-day cities have similar characteristics where roads are about

transportation and not about street life. Open spaces are statistically determined according to

master plans as green spaces. Development of cities is determined by statistical requirements

for shelter, function, security etc. Delhi is one such city that has forgotten about our old cities

leaving them as heterotopias – pockets of history and culture in its rapid growth. Delhi has



chosen to treat these urban villages as problems instead of using them as a contextual

parameter.

Furthermore, the Heterotopic character of these urban villages has left them in a grey

area. Without a solid identity, one must ponder the future of these villages. This dissertation

will study its virtues as well as its negative characteristics. It will also try to understand what is

it that sets it apart from the rest of the city and whether one must celebrate this difference or

abolish it altogether.

B A C K G R O U N D: C H I R A G D E L H I

Chirag Delhi is an urban village south of the Outer Ring Road. On plan, it has a

distinct square form which is enforced by status as a Lal Dora2 area. Under the Lal Dora, it is

under only partial jurisdiction of the Delhi authorities and offers very attractive rental rates

for the city’s immigrants. (Refer Appendix B) As a result, it is very densely packed with

irregularly shaped buildings, and a network of narrow streets. It retains its shape from an

ancient fort, a neat square whose gates still remain. The fort walls were built around the

Chirag Delhi Dargah which houses the Dargah of Naseeruddin Mahmud or Chirag-i-Dilli3 (c.

AD 1274 – AD 1556) which continues to be a religious pilgrimage, but perhaps not as popular

as the Nizamuddin Dargah. The wall was built under the rule of the Mughal Emperor

Mohammad Shah ‘Rangeela’ (r. AD 1719 - 48).

(World Monuments Fund, INTACH 2008)

2 Lal Dora - The metropolitan town of Delhi has grown on agricultural lands acquired from the villagers.

Initially, in building up of Lutyen's Delhi, the villages were relocated; later only their agricultural lands were

acquired and the residential areas were circumscribed by a red line and that is how the term Lal Dora came

into use. The process of urbanisation over the years has been engulfing the villages. Urban Delhi grew fast

around them while the villages remained within the confines of their Lal Doras.

For more details refer Annexure-I 3 Roshan Chirag-I-Dilli roughly translates to ‘The Illuminated light of Delhi’. The story is that during the

building of Tughlaqabad there was a shortage supply of oil for lamps for the worker to build the Sheikh

Naseeruddin Mohammad’s residence. The saint is said to have turned water from the nearby stream into oil

for his workers. Thereby, earning the title ‘Chirag-I-Dilli’.



Site Justification

In terms of this dissertation topic, this is an appropriate site particularly because of

its location and its Lal Dora status. This Lal Dora status makes it stand apart from the rest of

the city. The village is bordered by two very busy roads, to the north – the Outer Ring Road

and to the East – B. R. Ambedkar Road infamous for its BRT system. The village also

neighbours fairly newer districts like Saomi Nagar, Panchscheel Enclave, each with their own

social and physical morphology contrasting that of Chirag Delhi. The square village is divided

by two axes – with the Dargah in the centre. One of the axes lead to the Dargah, and the

other is a more commercial stretch. The streets open up to small public chowks at certain

intervals which act as social hubs. By virtue of its narrow streets, Chirag Delhi is

predominantly a pedestrian dominated village. Its streets and chowks are predominantly

social spaces as opposed to a passage for vehicular movement. Hence, the social activity

contrasts that of a newer settlement which has wide traffic oriented roads.

Fig. 2 Chirag Delhi and its Surroundings

Image Source: ed. Author (2012), Chirag Delhi: Aerial Imagery, Google earth 2012, Google

Inc. [Accessed 29th October 2012]

Considering its context and its own unique character, it seems an appropriate site

for the study in question.



M E T H O D O L O G Y

To pursue this topic, one must first understand the physical morphology of Chirag

Delhi, in order to get a grasp of its relation (if any) to its social morphology. This can be

studied by the following methods.

First-hand Observations

The study will use first-hand experiences of the author and observations of usage

patterns and social activities. It will also include documentation of experiences of other

visitors and the residents of Chirag Delhi. A lot of research data is available as many

architecture students have used it as the base for a project. The primary step would be to

research and collect this existing databank.

Figure Ground Drawings, Street Sections and Sketches will be used to explain the

character of these spaces and their usage. To understand the spatial morphology, a

framework needs to be developed based on an extensive study of existing material on social

space and spatiality.

Furthermore, in order to grasp the heterotopic character it is important to study the

cultural and historical evolution of the community of Chirag Delhi. This will help understand

the factors that shape the social structure of Chirag Delhi.

L I M I T A T I O N S O F S T U D Y

Although this research was carefully prepared, I am still aware of its limitations and

shortcomings. First of all, the research was conducted in a span of 3-4 months and justice was

not given to potential of the topic. Second, research data available on Chirag Delhi are dated to

the late 1990s and more current data was unavailable. Time restrictions did not allow for the

upgradation of this data. Also, most interviews were the viewpoints of small portion of the

village residents and may not accurately depict the entire picture. Lastly, it is unavoidable that in

this study, certain degree of subjectivity can be found. Many viewpoints are those of the author

and may considerably vary amongst my peers and seniors.



P R E L I M I N A R Y F I N D I N G S

FIRST IMPRESSIONS

The site can be approached by the Outer Ring Road or the Lal Bahadur Shastri Road.

The entry to Chirag Delhi however, is further inside and is accessible only through the

internal road network. What used to be a walled city is now reduced to a city with four

crumbling gates – a gate at each side. The fort walls have now been replaced with a different

interface – a commercial street that spills out onto the roads. These are mostly hardware

shops with a few dhabhas. The entry into Chirag Delhi (from the Outer Ring Road) is graced

with what seems to be an ancient gate. The crumbling gate makes one sceptical of the entry,

covered with advertisements for local amenities; it leads into a narrow street way.

First impressions of Chirag Delhi are of the narrow streets and of the general urban

decay. The streets are not the cleanest – bits of garbage are strewn at places. The smell of

food wafts into the street from the nearest dhabha. There are people shopping, walking by

performing their daily routine. Traffic Movement is restricted by virtue of the small roads,

though there are still cars and small tempos passing through. Apart from these occasional

vehicles, the streets are mostly pedestrian. As one accustoms to the maze-like character, the

streets become more ‘friendly’ and navigable.

As the road widths reduce the streets vehicular movement, the primary function of

a street – its circulation, is reduced to a degree. The streets now cater to the spill out of

commercial and household functions. The narrow widths of the streets also facilitate

communal interaction, as there are always eyes on the road. So there is not only social

activity at the base of the streets but at the upper floors as well.

Considering the density of Chirag Delhi, the streets compensate by opening into

chowks, these chowks are the dense centres of social activity. Usually formed around a

tree(s), they display both commercial (trade) and social exchange. The Dargah also plays an

important role in the social production of the streets.



T H E O R E T I C A L F R A M E W O R K: H E T E R O T O P I A S

HETEROTOPIAS: Origins

Michel Foucault introduced the concept of heterotopias in the field of cultural

geography at a lecture for architects in March 1967. It was later published under the title Des

Espace Autres (Of Other Spaces) by the French Journal Architecture /Mouvement/ Continuité

in October, 1984. In his lecture Foucault describes institutions and spaces that disturb the

everyday normality of ordinary spaces. He called these spaces heterotopic spaces. He gives

examples of mental institutions, prisons, old age home, brothels, museums, holiday resorts

implying the vast adaptability of the concept. (Deheane 2008) Though the vastness of term

has also been criticized, it has been vital to the understanding of spaces of specialized

character. For instance, cultural geographer Edward Soja describes the article as ‘frustratingly,

incomplete, inconsistent, incoherent’ but nonetheless devotes an entire chapter to it, in his

book Thirdspace. (Cenzatti 2008)

The term ‘heterotopia’ however has its origins in the medical and biological

contexts. It essentially implies a phenomenon in an unusual place indicating the spatial

displacement of normal tissue by an abnormal structure. In medical terminology it implies a

phenomenon that usually occurs as non-pathological heterogeneous condition that is present

in a heterogenic composition of tissue that is not normal to the part. (Sohn 2008)

Medical heterotopias have no known causes, no secondary effects and do not

affect the normal functioning of the overall organism in which they appear. (Sohn 2008)

Heterotopias as Social Space

Before proceeding further, it is essential to understand ‘space’ as fundamentally

bound with social reality as opposed to physical definitions of space contained by

quantitative parameters. This theory follows that space in itself can never serve as an

epistemological starting position. Space does not exist in itself, it is produced. (Lefebvre



1991:6) Everyday discourse serves to distinguish particular spaces, and in general to describe

a social space. They correspond to a specific use of that space, and hence to a spatial practice

that they express and constitute. This theory deviates from the common understanding of

space thoroughly only its physical characteristics such as shape, form and colour. According

to Lefebvre space is created by human beings by their sensitivity and imagination, their

thinking and their ideologies; human beings who enter into relationships with each other

through their activity and practice. (Schmid 2008:29)

“A spatial code is not simply a means of reading or

interpreting space: rather it is a means of living in that space, of

understanding it, and of producing it.’… These codes will be seen

as part of a practical relationship, as part of an interaction

between 'subjects' and their space and surroundings. “

(Lefebvre 1991:16)

Lefebvre explains space as a three dimensional product or a ‘spatial triad’. A space is

determined by its spatial practices (perceived), the representations of space (conceived) and

representational space (lived). (Lefebvre 1991:33) He sees space as these three moments

that co-exist, interact and producing a relationship with one and another.

Heterotopias can be seen as a representational space, based on a set of specific

relations in space. ‘As soon as the social relation and the appropriation of physical space end,

both space of representation and heterotopia disappear.’ (Cenzatti 2008) This spatial

difference becomes very evident in post-Fordist cities like New Delhi, where the city is

compost of different granules of smaller units.

Chirag Delhi is a space, whose structure can be understood by a set of spatial

relations that it maintains with the rest of the city. Its social space can be understood as the

notions of its residents as opposed to those of the residents living newer neighbourhoods.

The heterotopic character represents a boundary that separates the city

For further information refer to Annotated Bibliography



T H E O R E T I C A L F R A M E W O R K: T H I R D W A V E

The Third Wave is a theory by cultural anthropologist and futurologist Alvin Toffler

in 1960. It is the second in a trilogy preceded by Future Shock published in 1970. The book

identifies the advancement of the human race as three waves. The first wave was the

transformation of the human civilization from nomads into an agrarian society.

The First Wave economy was of an agrarian society where there was no

differentiation between producers and consumers, with little or no trade between them. The

land was the basis of economy, life, culture, family structure and politics all organized around

a single village unit. Goods were predominantly hand-crafted and made and distributed at a

custom scale. There were trade and commerce between different places, but they were

primitive. The societies of the First Wave world were predominantly primitive; women had no

say in major decisions of the community and were patriarchal in nature.

(Toffler 1980)

The Second Wave was brought on by the Industrial Revolution and immediately

accelerated the economy. It inclined toward a new technological and economic structure with

a false illusion of the finite nature of these resources. This shift however allowed the mass

production and trade of products. This brought about the divorce of consumers from

producers.

Industrialization also required mobility from its workers. Workers could no longer

be held behind by a large extended family. The nuclear family became an identifiable feature

of all Second Wave societies which were built on a factory model, mass standardised

education. Schools, hospitals, prisons, government bureaucracies and other organizations

took on the characteristics of a factor – the division of labour, its hierarchical structure and its

mechanic impersonality. Even in the field of arts, artisans were no longer working under a

patron but to sell their products in a “market” to a sea of anonymous consumers. While the

first wave civilization was based on fixed permanent settlements, industrialization allowed its

workers mobility to move from place to place. Industrialisation also saw the coming of

women into the fore-front, the women’s rights moment picks off with the second wave.

(Toffler 1980)



The Third Wave civilization is the post-industrial society. Most major cities today

are post-industrial cities. Toffler says that since the 1950s most countries are moving away

from their industrial roots and moving to an information age. The new technologies of the

Third Wave will give rise to new industries based on quantum electronics, information theory,

molecular biology, oceanic ecology and the space sciences. The Third Wave also opens up the

field of space exploration. This impact is underestimated by the general public but it is the

next frontier in the advancement of human civilization. The key to a Third Wave civilization is

flexibility. People can work where they want, when they want and for whom they want all by

virtue of the advancement in information technology.

(Toffler 1980)

For further information refer to Annotated Bibliography

CHIRAG DELHI: A CLASH OF WAVES

In terms of Toffler’s framework we can understand Chirag Delhi’s origins as a First

Wave settlement. It was primarily an agrarian settlement with centric focus around the

Dargah of Sheikh Naseeruddin Chirag-i-Dilli. It is mostly functionally independent of its

neighbouring villages except the Nizamuddin village whose namesake Hazrat Nizamuddin was

the mentor of Sheikh Naseeruddin Chirag-i-Dilli.

(INTACH 1996)

New Delhi is a typical post-Fordist city, made up of smaller multiple towns or cities.

Its features broadly identify it as a Third Wave city building up on information technology.

Chirag Delhi on the other hand is still experiencing the Second Wave since its acquisition into

the city half a century ago. Still many of its customs and morphology reflect those of a First

Wave City. Simultaneously the rest of the city is a undergoing the symptoms of the Third

Wave. Immigrants entering the city through urban villages like Chirag Delhi are also from First

Wave and Second Wave Settlements where each migrant looks to make their mark in the

Third Wave City of New Delhi.

The difference in these types of settlements is not just their physical characters or

their economic status. They differ also in social status, women have yet to find their place in



society, and education is still a matter of opportunity or status as opposed to a norm. A

survey by the INTACH revealed that the level of education the wife of the head of the

household (56.2 per cent illiterate) to be much lower than that of the head of the household.

A large number of residents considered female education as a lower priority to male

education. Education itself is dependent on the income of a particular household. In India, the

quality of education comes with a price, a lot of families in Chirag Delhi are unable afford a

higher standard of education.

(INTACH, 1997)

For more Information Refer Appendix B



C H I R A G D E L H I: T H E L A L D O R A E F F E C T

Chirag Delhi, like many other rural villages was at one point completely dependent

on agriculture and predominantly an agrarian economy. But, with the advent of Delhi’s urban

sprawl Chirag Delhi and other urban villages have been swallowed into an urban fabric,

completely transforming the villages’ morphology. During the colonial era, the city swallowed

nearly 50 villages and another 50 post-Independence.

Under the 1961 Master Plan for Delhi-1961, rural villages that were located within

urban areas of Delhi were declared as Urbanised Villages labelled as urban development.

There were 20 Urbanised Villages in 1961 in Delhi, and at present there are about 135 urban

villages and 52 census towns which form part of the National Capital Territory of Delhi

(NCTD). Since the late seventies, schemes have been hatched to improve the civic services,

initially by DDA and later transferred to the MCD. Since 1979-80, an amount of Rs. 366.09

crore of plan funds have been provided to the DDA/MCD and the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) for

development of these urban villages.

(Sehrawat, 2011)

Fig. 3 Representative

Diagram of the

Expansion of Urban

Limits

Image Source: Narayan S. (2001), Study of Lal Dora as a Concept, TVB School of Habitat Studies,

Unpublished B. Arch Thesis, New Delhi



During their reign, the British cleared away entire villages for the construction of

New Delhi, at times leaving behind only street names like Malcha and Raisina. The post-

Independence government however expanded Delhi’s borders around these villages. So while

Chirag Delhi might be an urban village, its immediate neighbours are posh, planned

settlements like those of Saomi Nagar, Panchscheel Enclave etc. These villages have been

stripped off their agrarian economy and forced to merge with city’s urban economy. While

the streets of the urban villages may be narrow and its houses small and cramped, there isn’t

a stark difference in wealth between Delhi’s urban and rural sprawls. However, there is a

stark social difference felt in this ‘status-driven’ metropolis.

(Soofi, 2008)

So an urban village may be defined as a traditional rural settlement which has altered

and merged with the urban areas, change being actuated by industrialisation, migration and

shifting paradigms. (INTACH, 1996) The Chirag Delhi village agricultural land was notified and

acquired in 1953 by the Delhi government for the resettlement of Punjabi refugees. (Gupta

1993:36)

Chirag Delhi, like other urban villages, is an Administrative Heterotopia as the

government has isolated it from the mainstream city. With this isolation of sorts comes other

forms of heterotopias that will be discussed in further chapters.



P H Y S I C A L M O R P H O L O GY

The Settlement

The Chirag Delhi Settlement grew around the residence (and later Dargah) of Sheikh

Naseeruddin Mahmud along the Satpallah tributary of the river Yamuna. And was originally a

part the Jahanpanah Forest Area. The village grew along the stream with the main bazaar

passing through it. (Gupta 1993) The Dargah is enclosed in a rectangular rubble-masonry

fort built by Muhammad Bin Tughlaq (1325-51). The gates were built to emphasize the axis

of the bazaar and the stream. The village grew along this axis and as it densified, the

remaining areas became built area. After Independence the government acquire the

remaining farmland for urbanisation.

The Chirag Delhi village slowly grew around the Dargah for two reasons – disciples

of the saint and the fort acted as protection from the surrounding wildlife. (World

Monuments Fund, INTACH 2008) Originally the enclosed are contained only a few scattered

havelis (private mansions) and hujuras (small single rooms) of the Khadims of the Dargah.

(INTACH 1996)

As the settlement grew, one story house slowly added more storeys and extended

retail shops on the streets, as a result of which the streets narrowed, changing the original

morphology of the street. Now to increase opportunities for rent many have increased their

houses up to four or five storeys. Hence, the quality of life is reduced in such places.

Inverted Character

Roughly till Independence, Chirag Delhi grew as a traditional settlement – around a

central core within a restricted or perhaps protective shell. The core of the settlement was

the Dargah and the settlement grew around it and the axis created Muhammad Bin Tughlaq

within the fort walls. However, with the Urbanisation of the village, the core of the village

has inverted. Chirag Delhi is now defined by the through roads that flank it – the Outer Ring

Road and the BRT Corridor. It no longer has a central core, the village now looks outward.



Fig. 8 Chirag Delhi – Past Introverted Character

Fig. 9 Chirag Delhi: Present Extroverted Character

Image(s) Source: Author (2012), New Delhi



Fig. 10 Transformation of Landuse and Physical Morphology

Image Source: Author (2012), New Delhi

Base Information: Gupta, M. (1993) Chirag Delhi: A Case Study of Urbanisation, Unpublished B. Arch

Dissertation, School of Planning and Architecture, IP Estate, New Delhi



Fig. 4 Physical Morphology of Chirag Delhi

The grain of Chirag Delhi can be compared with that of Saomi Nagar shown below.

Base Image Source: Mitchell, M. (2010), Namaste Delhi – Architecture of Rapid Change and Scarce Resources: Chirag Delhi, London Metropolitan University London, pg. 17



Fig. 5 Saomi Nagar Neighbourhood Study

Image Source: Bhatia, S. (2011) Neighbourhood Study: Saomi Nagar, Housing Studio, Studio Co-ordinator: Gupta, R., USAP, New Delhi



Fig. 6 Chirag Delhi: Street Morphology

Fig. 7 Saomi Nagar Street Morphology

A comparison of the street morphology of Chirag Delhi with that of its more modern counterparts – Saomi Nagar. Image(s) Source: Author (2012), New Delhi

The comparison of street morphology reveals a similar plotted typology but largely

differing in scale. And typically, Chirag Delhi’s modern counterparts are planned, its open areas

defined and designed on the basis of the city’s Master Plan. Chirag Delhi however displays an

organic character. This has resulted in narrow streets, encroachment and poor lighting. But at

the same time it creates a more interactive environment, the streets are predominantly active,

open spaces are used to their full potential. These characteristics are not apparent in the

neighbouring colonies.



The Chowk

The chowk plays a very important role in the production of social space in Chirag

Delhi. They are usually created at the intersection of two streets. Morphologically, they open

up the streets, creating a contrasting environment as opposed to narrow inward character of

the streets.

In order to identify socially active chowks, I identified five different spaces that

showed characteristics of a chowk on the base plan and proceeded to observe these chowks.

Of the five, two were formed around a tree and could be classified as moderately active

mainly because of commercial activity. One was the backyard of a car workshop and two

were the centres of a social activity.

Many chowks if not encroached by new construction, are used for parking or as

garbage dumps. They also act as spill-over spaces because of the high density of people living

in the area.

The Street

Over the last century, the traditional urban structures of our cities have changed

drastically. And it is important to study this morphological transformation of our historical

cities to understand the cultural and social implications of space. The modern city produces a

functional street, which caters to elementary needs of movement. But it does not create

space bound by volume. The significant meaning behind the street is lost to function of

movement.

The streets of Chirag Delhi follow a hierarchical pattern. The primary streets are

along the main axes of the village and are important commercial centres. There is partial

vehicular movement on these streets. The secondary streets allow less or vehicular

movement and predominantly pedestrian. Some streets barely allow light to enter because

of the encroachment by adjacent houses.



Fig. 11 Section through Main Village Chowk

The village chowk is the biggest chowk in Chirag Delhi after the Dargah Chowk. It is a part of the main

axes, and activity observed here is predominantly economic based. This was the main central chowk

of the village when the Panchayat was still intact.

Fig. 12 Section through Main Bazaar, Chirag Delhi

Image Source: USAP (2010), Chirag Delhi Study, II Year Design Studio, USAP 2009-2014 Batch, USAP,

Kashmere Gate, New Delhi. Studio Coordinator: Gupta, A., USAP, New Delhi



The Dargah

History

The Dargah is the shrine of Sheikh Naseeruddin Mahmud, a 14th century saint-king,

a disciple and later successor of Nizamuddin Auliya who was regarded as the ‘Lamp of Delhi’

– ‘Roshan Chirag-e-Dilli’. The Dargah complex encloses smaller tombs, a prayer hall and a

masjid and has a gated entry.


“Perhaps the most charming aspect of the dargah complex is its relatively

untouched, non-commercial nature: it’s quiet and tranquil, with shady trees dotting the

irregular rectangle of the compound. Worshippers come and go, but mostly in silence, and

there’s a serenity that would probably have appealed to Chirag-i-Dilli himself.”


Observations and Analysis

To reach the Dargah complex one must navigate through a series of narrow chaotic

streets to arrive at a chowk bordering the complex. To enter the complex, one must cover

their head and remove their foot-wear. Compared to the rest of Chirag Delhi, the Dargah has

a calm and peaceful ambience which is contrasted by the busy streets outside. This

difference or contrast in spaces helps further sanctify the space of the Dargah.

The Dargah could possibly be understood in terms of Foucault’s heterotopic spaces

or the ‘other’ spaces. (Foucault 1967)The Dargah is a contrasting space; its value is in fact

derived from this difference. It acts as an ‘other’ space that acts along-side existing spaces. It

is an object that exists in time, while at the same time it is reminiscent of a past time when

the Dargah was more popular visited by many Sufi patrons. While Chirag Delhi continues to

internally densify, the Dargah retains its immediate walls making it frozen in time. It also falls

into the category of a religious heterotopic space. While it is a public space, it is not truly

‘public’ as its entry is restricted. The ritual of removing one’s footwear or covering one’s

head must be preceded before one’s entry.



In the same sense, perhaps Chirag Delhi could also be categorized a heterotopic space.

Morphologically, its fabric differs from surrounding areas where it shows organic growth as

opposed to a planned settlement. As a Lal Dora area, it does not fall under standard

government regulations. Because of this character, the rent is cheap and Chirag Delhi is

home to many of the city’s immigrants. Hence, Chirag Delhi is in itself a space of difference.

The Chirag Delhi Dargah could possibly be described as heterotopic space within a

heterotopic space.

Fig. 13 The Dargah of Sheikh Naseeruddin Chirag-i-Dilli, Plan, Section

Plan and Sectional view of the Chirag Delhi Dargah, the Mausoleum of Sheikh Naseeruddin Mahmud,

Chirag Delhi, New Delhi

Image Source: USAP (2011), Chirag Delhi Study, II Year Design Studio, USAP 2010-2015 Batch, Studio

Coordinator: Gupta, A., USAP, New Delhi



Fig. 14 Chirag Delhi Dargah Complex – The Mausoleum of Sheikh Naseeruddin Mahmud

Fig. 15 Generic Street of Chirag Delhi

Both images show the contrast between the quality of space in the Dargah and in the

streets of Chirag Delhi.

Image(s) Source: Author (2010), Chirag Delhi, Delhi



S O C I A L S T R U C T U R E

The total population of the Chirag Delhi District according to the 1991 AD census is

around 12,97,000. (INTACH, 1996)This figure however takes into account the entire district,

which also includes neighboring areas such Greater Kailash, Khirki village, etc. The actual

population of Chirag Delhi is 25,000 according to a MCD Electoral document. (Gaboli, 2012)

INTACH has done intensive documentation work in Chirag Delhi and have produced a

publication under their Process for Historic Development project.

According to the survey conducted by the INTACH team and personal interviews

showed that the community has a wide spread problem of unemployment. INTACH’s case

study shows that more than half the population (59.3 percent) belongs to the age group 18-

60 years. However quite of them are unemployed.

Personal interviews with the residents revealed that unemployment is major issue.

Many fall in to the trap of gambling, alcoholism and drugs. A primary cause for

unemployment is a change in the major change in occupation as farmers due to the

acquisition of farmland in 1953. Due to the loss of the traditional occupation, the villagers

now survive on earnings from rented properties or seek jobs in the city. (Gupta 1993:36)

From interviews with the residents, it was observed that since many of the owners

already have a fixed source of income by the rent they needn’t look for jobs. Many of these

men can be found playing cards in the main chowks throughout the village.

According to its residents there are many social evils in Chirag Delhi ranging from

rampant unemployment, excessive alcoholism and gambling. Domestic abuse is also

common here as well abuse of the elders. The residents feel that such an environment is

not conducive for the upbringing of their children.

(INTACH 1996)



Fig. 16 Playing Cards – Unemployment

The widespread unemployment is because of alternative sources of income (rent) and

lack of job opportunities in the city.

Image Source: Author (2010), Chirag Delhi, New Delhi

In Foucault’s understanding of Heterotopias, many of these spaces are assigned to or

identified with individuals who do not fit into modern social order. (Cenzatti 2008) While

Foucault talks about heterotopias in terms of prisons or mental hospitals, a similar trend can

be seen here as well. The nullification of the agrarian settlement has left many without a

secure source of income or income through rent. Such a phenomenon has left the occupants

in isolation within their chowks, playing cards, gambling, resorting to alcoholism. The urban

sprawl of Delhi has left villagers in and isolated realm; forcing them to abandon a culture and

a way of life in order to merge with the city, making them anomalies in the “normal” social

order. Therefore this represents a social heterotopia.



C O N C L U S I O N S

F I N D I N G S

It is apparent from the information gathered about Chirag Delhi and a comparative

study with that of Foucault’s framework of Other Places is that Chirag Delhi displays

characteristics comparable to that of Heterotopias. It also needs to be mentioned that most of

these characteristics are generic to those of most urban villages in Delhi.

Typically, observations and statistics lead to the conclusion that places like Chirag

Delhi are slums.4 Furthermore it needs to be understood that Delhi is a city of migrants. The

Delhi Master Plan predicts a 30% population increase from 182.0 lakhs in 2011 to 230 lakhs in

2021. (Refer Annexure-I) Most slums today are identified with urban decay. Amongst

politicians and policy-makers, urban development correlates to “slum-free” cities.5 People

tend to focus on the poor living conditions of the slums and urban villages. It is apparent that

there is a static view of these urban conditions, a standard western interpretation. But these

urban villages must be viewed as stepping stone to the city purely in terms of the city’s

migrators.

“…when property rights are clear, slums can upgrade themselves.

Delhi’s Lal Dora villages are good examples. As the city has expanded, the

farmers living in surrounding villages sold their land but continued to own

their homes in the former villages. These were usually converted into slums

for construction workers. When the construction activity drifted away, a new

population of drivers, security guards and domestics moved in. Over time,

4 Chirag Delhi was declared as a slum under the DDA in 1976

Also, in this particular case, the term ‘slum’ is defined as a – ‘Compact area of at least 300

population or about 60-70 households of poorly built congested tenements, in unhygienic environment

usually with inadequate infrastructure and lacking in proper sanitary and drinking water facilities’

5 This refers to the Delhi government’s goal to make the capital a slum-free city by the year 2014. This has

however led to unpopular displacement of slum dwellers over the last decade.

Source: Bhatnagar G. V. (2012) “Delhi Govt. Displaces Slum Dwellers Mindlessly”, THE HINDU, New Delhi



this population too got absorbed into the general urban landscape and we

saw yet another wave of new residents— students, salesmen and store

clerks. Eventually, some villages became home to expensive boutiques, cafes

and art galleries (as happened in Hauz Khas), clusters of cheap hotels (as in

Mahipalpur) or a warren of small offices (Shahpur Jat).The point is that these

“villages” have proved amazingly nimble and Delhi could not function

without them. Since property rights were clear, the former farmers steadily

invested in their property and became quite rich. Along the way, they routed

thousands of migrants and created innumerable jobs.”

(Sanyal 2010)

So it is important not to consider these areas as static areas but, as Sanjeev

Sanyal says (Sanyal 2010) “property ladders”. There remains the possibility that Chirag

Delhi might in the future, become a rental accommodation hub with hostels and dorm

rooms. Or even the possibility of becoming the epitome of small scale industries.6

Amongst industries the garment industry is the most prominent. The Dargah also plays

an important role with the potential of historic and cultural hub

The leading trend is that the demographic and economic structure continues to

change as younger financially sound families are being replaced by economically

weaker, male labour population migrating from neighbouring states looking for work as

cheap labour. These residents contrary to their older counterparts do not have a strong

emotional connection to area. Like the rest of the city they are in a hurry moving on

with their live. As they move up economically they will move out of Chirag Delhi looking

for a better quality of life. This leaves the older residents in a static heterotopic state.

The Heterotopia of Chirag Delhi also represents certain nostalgia. It signifies a

time in history but at the same time looking to the outside. The older residents are

nostalgic and reluctant to leave but their children like the dynamic migrants are looking

for possibility outside.

6 According the INTACH Report on Chirag Delhi, The Role of Chirag Delhi is – 1. Provision of low budget rental

accommodation. 2. Small-scale industries attracting its workforce from other parts of Delhi. 3. Building Material and

supply shops along the periphery which serve the neighbourhoods around the area.

For More Information Refer Appendix - B



F U R T H E R S T U D Y

In the process of its urban expansion how should Delhi react to the small pockets of

history in its path?

Currently Delhi has approached these anomalies by building boundary walls around

its historic centers or tying metaphorical red threads around them (Lal Dora). Thereby, visibly

distinguishing places like Chirag Delhi as the odd one out as opposed to integrating it to the

city’s functioning. And over the last few decades the MCD and the DDA have sought to bring

these ‘urban villages’ into the main stream urban condition.

But by virtue of its physical and social morphology Chirag Delhi would always

remain out of place from the main stream city. So perhaps the best way of integrating a place

like Chirag Delhi into the city is to celebrate its difference.

Urban planning should bring about building development controls that work

specifically for Chirag Delhi and not standard controls the work for the rest of the city, or even

standard controls for all urban villages. Building development controls must be identified

recognizing the unique nature of each urban village, its surrounding context and its historic

value. Developmental controls must determine or adhere to the traditional typology of the

area appropriating for more habitable living conditions.



.

Fig. 19 Landuse Plan of Chirag Delhi Main Axes

Image Source: USAP (2010), Chirag Delhi Study, II Year Design Studio, USAP 2009-2012 Batch, Studio

Coordinator: Gupta, A., USAP, New Delhi

Base Information:



A N N O T AT E D B I B L I O G R A P H Y

1. The Production Of Space, Henri Lefebvre

Henri Lefebvre, a French Philosopher, was born in 1901. His intellectual consciousness was

shaped by his experience in the First World War, the Russian Revolution and an intellectual change,

which he describes in his book. The Production of Space, around 1910 where a certain space, the space

of common sense, knowledge, social practice and political power was shattered.

By Production Lefebvre does not strictly mean the economic production of things but also the

larger philosophical concept, the production of oeuvres, the production knowledge, of institutions, of

all that constitutes society.

Lefebvre posts a theory that understands space as fundamentally bound up with social

reality. It follows that space “in itself” can never serve as an epistemological starting position. Space

does not exist “in itself”, it is produced. He proceeds from a relational concept of space and time.

Space stands for simultaneity, the synchronic order of social reality, and time denotes the dichronic

order, thus the historic process of social production.

In his book he explains that (social) space can be analysed in relation to these three

dimensions. In the first, social space appears in the dimension of spatial practice as an interlinking

chain or network of activities or interactions which on their part rest upon a determinate material basis

(morphology, built environment). In the second, this spatial practice can be linguistically defined and

demarcated as space and then constitutes a representation of space. This representation serves as an

organizing

Schema or a frame of reference for communication, which permits a (spatial) orientation

and thus co-determines activity at the same time. In the third, spaces of representation the material

“order” that emerges on the ground can itself become the vehicle conveying meaning. In this way a

(spatial) symbolism develops that expresses and evokes social norms, values, and experiences.

2. Of Other Places – Utopias and Heterotopias, Michel Foucault In this article, Foucault introduces the concept of Heterotopic spaces or ‘other’ space. These

spaces are created by contrasting character. They represent spaces that exist in isolation.



Foucault identifies six principles that can be used to determine heterotopic spaces. The first

principle identifies crisis heterotopias - there are privileged or sacred or forbidden places, reserved for

individuals who are, in relation to society and to the human environment in which they live, in a state

of crisis: adolescents, menstruating women, pregnant women, the elderly, etc.

The second principle identifies the heterotopia of the cemetery. The cemetery is certainly a

place unlike ordinary cultural spaces. It is a space that is however connected with all the sites of the

city, state or society or village, etc., since each individual, each family has relatives in the cemetery. In

western culture the cemetery has practically always existed. But it has undergone important changes.

The third principle identifies the heterotopia that is capable of juxtaposing in single real place

several spaces, several sites that are in themselves incompatible. ‘Thus it is that the theatre brings

onto the rectangle of the stage, one after the other, a whole series of places that are foreign to one

another; thus it is that the cinema is a very odd rectangular room, at the end of which, on a two-

dimensional screen, one sees the projection of a three-dimensional space, but perhaps the oldest

example of these heterotopias that take the form of contradictory sites is the garden.’

The fourth principle talks about the heterotopia of time. They are most often linked to slices

in time—the heterotopia begins to function at full capacity when men arrive at a sort of absolute break

with their traditional time. He gives the example of museums to support this principle as they

represent an accumulation of time. Heterotopias of time can be explained by fleeting spaces like that

of a fair ground.

The fifth principle talks about heterotopias of restricted places. Heterotopias always

presuppose a system of opening and closing that both isolates them and makes them penetrable. In

general, the heterotopic site is not freely accessible like a public place. Either the entry is compulsory,

as in the case of entering a barracks or a prison, or else the individual has to submit to rites and

purifications. To get in one must have permission and make certain gestures or perform a ritual.

The sixth principle talks about contrasting spaces. The last trait of heterotopias is that they

have a function in relation to all the space that remains. This function unfolds between two extreme

poles. Either their role is to create a space of illusion that exposes every real space, all the sites inside of

which human life is partitioned, as still more illusory. To illustrate this principle, he gives the example

of a brothel.



3. Third Wave: The Classic Study of Tomorrow, Alvin Toffler

The Third Wave is a book by cultural anthropologist and futurologist Alvin Toffler in 1960. It

is the second in a trilogy preceded by Future Shock published in 1970. The book identifies the

advancement of the human race as three waves. The first wave was the transformation of the human

civilization from nomads into an agrarian society.

The First Wave economy was of an agrarian society where there was no differentiation

between producers and consumers, with little or no trade between them. The First Wave civilization’s

population could be divided into two categories – the primitive and the civilized. The land was the

basis of economy, life, culture, family structure and politics all organized around a single village unit.

Their main source of energy was human and animal muscle power of direct energy from the sun, wind

and water. Goods were predominantly hand-crafted and made and distributed at a custom scale.

There were trade and commerce between different places, but they were primitive. The societies of

the First Wave world were predominantly primitive; women had no say in major decisions of the

community and were patriarchal in nature.

The Second Wave was brought on by the Industrial Revolution and immediately accelerated

the economy. These societies derived energy from irreplaceable fossil fuels from the earth’s energy

reserves. It inclined toward a new technological and economic structure with a false illusion of the

finite nature of these resources. This shift however allowed the mass production and trade of

products. This brought about the divorce of consumers from producers. The second wave brought

machines under a synchronized system. Industrialization also required mobility from its workers.

Workers could no longer be held behind by a large extended family. The nuclear family became an

identifiable feature of all Second Wave societies which were built on a factory model, mass

standardised education. Industrialisation also saw the coming of women into the fore-front, the

women’s rights moment picks off with the second wave.

The Third Wave civilization is the post-industrial society. Most major cities today are post-

industrial cities. Toffler says that since the 1950s most countries are moving away from their industrial

roots and moving to an information age. The new technologies of the Third Wave will give rise to new

industries based on quantum electronics, information theory, molecular biology, oceanic ecology and

the space sciences. The Third Wave also opens up the field of space exploration. This impact is

underestimated by the general public but it is the next frontier in the advancement of human

civilization. The key to a Third Wave civilization is flexibility. People can work where they want, when

they want and for whom they want all by virtue of the advancement in information technology.



APPENDIX – A

The following is an extract from the Report of the Expert of the Lal Dora Committee.

Source: Shrivastav P. P (2007) Report of Expert Cte. On Lal Dora in Delhi (ECLD), Union Ministry of Urban

Development, New Delhi

THE BACKGROUND

2.1.1 As per the 2005-06 edition of the Economic Survey of Delhi, the total population of Delhi (2001

census) stood at 138,50507 out of which the urban population was 129,05780 (93.18%). Out of Delhi's

total area of 1483 sq. km, the urban area was 924.68 sq. km. Thus the area of rural Delhi stood at

558.32 sq. km and the population was 9,44,727 (say 9.5 lakh) in 2001. Draft Master Plan 2021 has

projected Delhi's population in 2011 at 182.0 lakh and 230.0 lakh in 2021.

2.1.2 While Appendix 1 of the Delhi Land Reforms Rules, 1954 lists 358 villages in the UT of Delhi, the

Tejendra Khanna Committee Report has put the number of villages at 362. Possibly some Revenue

Estates created subsequently by the Lt. Governor of Delhi have been included in the list of villages.

135 villages out of these have been declared as urbanized villages and thus the remaining 227 remain

as rural villages. 15 out of these 227 villages stand recommended by MCD (since the year 2000) to the

Govt. of NCT of Delhi for being declared as urban u/s 507 of DMC Act. The notification to this effect is

yet to be issued by Govt. of NCT of Delhi.

2.1.3 The metropolitan town of Delhi has grown on agricultural lands acquired from the villagers.

Initially, in building up of Lutyen's Delhi, the villages were relocated; later only their agricultural lands

were acquired and the residential areas (abadi deh) were circumscribed by a red line and that is how

the term Lal Dora came into use. The process of urbanisation over the years has been engulfing the

villages. Urban Delhi grew fast around them while the villages remained within the confines of their Lal

Doras. The close layouts and narrow lanes of old village abadis were conditioned by old (now

outdated) historical compulsions of collective security, considerations of mutual interdependence and

availability all-round of vast open agricultural fields. Now with agricultural fields (that provided the

open environment) having been acquired by DDA or grabbed/colonised by market forces driven by

skyrocketing land-values, on the one hand and with natural increase in village population on the other,

the village abadis have become intolerably cramped. It has not been possible to extend even the

basic-most civic services like water-supply and sewage-disposal in the narrow twisting streets and

haphazard layouts within Lal Dora in all the 135 urbanized villages as on date. Most of the dwelling

units are inaccessible to ambulances and fire-tenders to attend to emergencies.



2.1.4 What is still worse is that the villagers have been deprived of their principal, if not the sole

means of permanent sustenance - their agricultural fields and space to maintain cattle. A farmer's life

is as inextricably linked with Report of Expert Cte. On Lal Dora agricultural fields as a tribal's is to the

forests that have sustained his past generations. One-time compensation at government rates for land

acquired tends to go as fast as it comes. It is hardly an adequate recompense for land (with ever-

escalating value in the urbanization process) that is a permanent and perennial source of sustenance.

Deprived of agricultural land and facilities for keeping cattle, the villagers were driven to opening

shops, start small industries wherever they could; renting out their premises for godowns, offices and

the like. With urban Delhi hard-pressed for dwelling units to house the flood of in-migrants from

elsewhere, and consequent sky-rocketing of value of vacant land, many villagers were tempted to sell

off their lands to colonizers and builders. The areas covered by extension of Lal Dora and agricultural

fields around the villages - both acquired and unacquired - became favourite hunting ground of the

middle-class - lower and higher - to satisfy their need of cheap housing. Thanks to the alleged collusion

between colonisers and enforcement agencies, highly sub-standard unauthorized colonies

mushroomed in these areas. A big list of 1432 such colonies is slated for regularization as of date and

reportedly, a proposal to add 88 more to this list is under consideration.

2.1.5 In the shadow of these developments and with their age-old traditional means of sustenance

taken away from them, can one blame the villagers for the shops and industries, godowns and show-

rooms that have come up in violation, technically speaking, of the laws and bye-laws, rules and

regulations? In the struggle for survival and sustenance, it was either this technical violation or taking

to violence and crime.

2.1.6 The solution to the problems of rural villages lies in finding ways that would inspire the villagers

themselves, at least the younger generation, to demand that they be permitted to enhance the value

of their property by making as intensive use of their lands as feasible through redevelopment. The

Committee also feels, very broadly at the macro-level, that with our rural brethren (6.82% of Delhi's

total population) living in 37.64% of the total land area of Delhi, it should not be difficult to adequately

meet not only the present but also the future needs of our villages. Creation of good modern housing

and commercial areas in multi-storey complexes would mean substantial enhancement in the value of

their property. It would not be necessary for anyone to move away from their original area: all their

non-residential activities could also be met in the vicinity itself. In fact, new markets could be created

for fresh commercial and trading activity adding to the prosperity of the villages. That would also

relieve the acute scarcity of commercial premises in Delhi which is causing so many problems for the

traders. Further details of this strategy will be discussed elsewhere in this Report.



The following is an

extract from the INTACH

Report: Process for

Historic Site

Development: Chirag

Delhi, 1996

Source: INTACH (1996),

Process for Historic Site

Development: Chirag

Delhi – A Case Study,

INTACH, Lodhi Road,

New Delhi.



R E F E R E N C E S

1. Agarwal, M. (2003) Urban Villages – An Oxymoron?, Down To Earth, 15 June 2003, [Online]

Available from: www.downtoearth.org.in/print/13014

[Accessed 23 September 2012]

2. Buchanen, P. (2011) The Big Rethink: The Purposes of Architecture, The Architectural Review, 27

March 2012 [Online]

Available from: http://www.architectural-review.com/the-big-rethink/8625733.article?blocktitle=Towards-a-

Complete-Architecture/

[Accessed 22 August 2012]

3. Cenzatti, M (2008) Heterotopias of Difference, Deheane, M. Ed. (2008) Heterotopia and the City ,

Routledge, New York

4. Foucault, M. (1967) Of Other Spaces: Utopias and Heterotopias, Trans. Miskoviec, J. (1984),

Architecture /Mouvement/ Continuité, [Online]

Available from: http://foucault.info/documents/heteroTopia/foucault.heteroTopia.en.html


5. Gupta, A. (1996), Thesis: A Study of the Urban Morphology of Chirag Delhi, Unpublished B. Arch

Thesis, TVB School of Habitat Studies, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi

6. Gupta, M. (1993) Chirag Delhi: A Case Study of Urbanisation, Unpublished B. Arch Dissertation,

School of Planning and Architecture, IP Estate, New Delhi

7. Hetherington, K. (1997) The Badlands of Moderntiy: Heterotopia and Social Ordering, Routledge,

London

8. Gaboli, V. (2012) MCD Elections 2012: Chirag Delhi Ward, Pagelines, New Delhi

Available from: http://vineet.gaboli/pagelines/19u-ew9d


9. Gangmei G (2009) “Delhi Urban Villages: Reality or Gem of a Sham”, M.A. Students of Journalism,

Jamia Milia Islamia, Fotonix, Blogspot, New Delhi

Available From: http://fotonix.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/delhi-urban-village-reality-or-gem-of-a-

sham/ [Accessed 18 December 2012]

10. INTACH (1996), Process for Historic Site Development: Chirag Delhi – A Case Study, INTACH, Lodhi

Road, New Delhi.

11. Lefebvre, H. (1974) The Production of Space, Trans. Nicholson-Smith, D. (1991) Blackwell

Publishing, Oxford, UK

http://www.downtoearth.org.in/print/13014

http://www.architectural-review.com/the-big-rethink/8625733.article?blocktitle=Towards-a-Complete-Architecture/

http://www.architectural-review.com/the-big-rethink/8625733.article?blocktitle=Towards-a-Complete-Architecture/

http://foucault.info/documents/heteroTopia/foucault.heteroTopia.en.html





12. Mitchell, M. (2010), Namaste Delhi – Architecture of Rapid Change and Scarce Resources: Chirag

Delhi, London Metropolitan University London

13. Narayan S. (2001), Study of Lal Dora as a Concept, TVB School of Habitat Studies, Unpublished

B.Arch. Thesis, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi

14. Sanyal, S. (2010), Reinventing Slums – No Home Left Behind, India Today [Online] 20 Sept 2010

Available From: http://www.sustainableplanetinstitute.org/India%20Today%20Slums%20Sept10.pdf

[Accessed 18 November 2012]

15. Schmid, C. (2008) Space, Difference, Everyday Life: Lefebvre’s Theory of the Production of Space:

Towards a Three Dimensional Dialectic, Routledge, New York

16. Sehrawat, D. (2011) OPINION: Delhi’s Country Cousins, Tehelka [Online] 22 June 2011

Available from: http://www.tehelka.com/story_main50.asp?filename=Ws22062011Delhi.asp

[Accessed 3 October 2012]

17. Shrivastav P. P (2007) Report of Expert Cte. On Lal Dora in Delhi (ECLD), Union Ministry of Urban

Development, New Delhi

18. Sohn, H (2008) Heterotopia: anamnesis of a medical term, Deheane, M. Ed. (2008) Heterotopia

and the City , Routledge, New York

19. Soofi, M. A. (2008) The Delhi Walla: Feature – Delhi, The City of Villages, Blogspot, Google Inc.,

[Online] 11 July 2008

Available from: http://thedelhiwalla.blogspot.in/2008/07/feature-delhi-city-of-villages.html


20. Toffler, A. (1980) The Third Wave – A Classic Study of Tomorrow, Bantam Books, New York

21. Vagale, U. (2004) Thesis: Bangalore – Future trends in Public Open Space Usage, [Online] Virginia

Tech, Blacksburg

Available from: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-05172004-231956/

[Accessed 30 August 2012]

22. World Monuments Fund, INTACH (2008), Delhi Heritage Route Project: Chirag and Khirki, World

Monuments Fund, New Delhi

http://www.tehelka.com/story_main50.asp?filename=Ws22062011Delhi.asp

http://thedelhiwalla.blogspot.in/2008/07/feature-delhi-city-of-villages.html

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-05172004-231956/

The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi

Documents

Transcript of The Heterotopic Space of Chirag Delhi