The Problem of Pro Bono Litigation in Demolition Matters

By Talha Abdul Rahman

At the Chambers of Talha Abdul Rahman, we frequently engage in legal aid representation, particularly in slum demolition cases, the protection of auqaf, and the safeguarding of heritage sites. In this blog, I highlight some of the most painful issues we have encountered in slum demolition matters.

Pro bono litigation is often seen as the last resort for marginalized communities facing forced evictions. Despite the judgment of the Delhi High Court and legislation protecting slums that existed before 01.01.2006, there is an abject disregard for the law. Demolition agencies twist facts, manipulate records, and bulldoze over human rights—sometimes literally.

In one case we handled pro bono before the Delhi High Court, the court took an elitist and narrow view that the absence of an electricity connection meant the slums could not be considered pre-2006 settlements. It perversely ignored crucial evidence—ration cards, school certificates, driver's licenses, and other documents—focusing only on what was missing rather than what was available.

We have raced against time too many times. While courts function on schedules, bulldozers do not. The homes we try to save are often lost even before a file reaches the judge's desk. Mentioning a matter for urgent listing is exhausting, and even if it is listed post-lunch, it is often too late. In one case, despite securing a same-day listing order, the case could not reach the concerned judge before 2:15 PM—by which time the homes had been reduced to rubble. Authorities deliberately orchestrate demolitions at times when seeking judicial intervention becomes nearly impossible, and often, even prior notice is not given.

No development authority in the country offers legal aid. On the other hand, in criminal cases, legal aid is mandatory at the time of remand. But there is no such provision in demolition matters. People have to choose between spending their ticking moments rushing to a lawyer's office or desperately trying to salvage their belongings before the State’s iron monster—a bulldozer—destroys everything.

No one in the system truly cares. There is no state legal aid, and the courts often look the other way while families lose everything. While there is a pressing need for strong pro bono support from senior advocates, only a handful of warriors are fighting this battle for dignity – and that too each time. 

I will take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank senior advocates Mr. Sanjoy Ghose, Mr. Gautam Narayan and Mr. Shoeb Alam, who have always raced with us – against time and appeared for us pro bono in such demolition matters.

The Issue of Ground Coordination

Effective legal intervention in demolition matters requires on-ground coordination. Social activists or paralegals are needed to translate legal jargon into actionable steps for affected communities. But such coordination is rare, leaving slum dwellers confused and helpless. Many do not understand what a stay order means, when to appear in court, or even what their legal rights are. Collecting documents and signatures in the midst of chaos is a near-impossible task.

Demolition matters, while presenting their own unique challenges, offer a remarkable opportunity to foster solidarity and shared purpose in the pursuit of protecting slum dwellers. These cases deepen one's understanding of urban planning, particularly by revealing how the needs of the marginalised poor are often overlooked in developed areas—left to remain invisible within the crevices of our cities. A significant positive in many such matters is the ability to secure temporary relief against immediate demolition, thereby creating space for meaningful legal intervention and the assertion of rights.

Only lawyers with an exceptionally high emotional quotient take up these cases. But no such lawyer emerges from them unscathed. My soul carries wounds from many battles—Akbar Nagar (Lucknow), Sunder Nursery Slum Demolition (Delhi), Kali Bari Slum Demolition (Delhi), and the still-pending Madrasi Camp case in Delhi. Every site is a fresh heartbreak, every court date a new chapter in systemic apathy.

The absence of state-sponsored legal aid and the sheer lack of empathy within the system exacerbate this problem. Public legal aid services are either non-existent or functionally useless. Many state-appointed lawyers do little beyond token representation. The burden then falls on pro bono lawyers who are already stretched thin, forced to fight not just for their clients but against a system that views them as irritants rather than advocates for justice.

Pro bono lawyers often shoulder a heavy workload and deserve greater institutional and peer support. I recall the valuable assistance offered by students from NUJS during the Sunder Nursery demolition matter—their contributions were not only intellectually helpful but also a powerful reminder that one is not alone in challenging systemic prejudice and institutional inertia. Moments like these reaffirm the strength of collective effort in the pursuit of justice.

Losing Hope: The Struggle Against Judicial Apathy

For courts, a slum demolition case is just another file. But for those being evicted, it is their entire world crumbling down. Clients approach the judiciary with hope, only to see it fade with every adjournment, every procedural delay. Many judges fail to grasp the human cost of their decisions, reducing an existential crisis into a sterile legal debate on urban planning.

Worse, unethical legal practices prey on the vulnerability of the displaced. Some lawyers, more attracted by the spotlight than a true commitment to justice, hold onto cases without taking any meaningful action. They neither fight for a resolution nor relinquish the brief, leaving petitioners trapped in limbo. Meanwhile, touts take advantage of the confusion, extracting money in the name of non-existent lawyers, then disappearing—leaving the victims of demolition doubly cheated.

Pro bono lawyers do not just fight in court. We battle exhaustion, apathy, and an entire system.

Torn Between Survival and Legal Battles

For the displaced, survival is an immediate and daily battle. Many are rickshaw pullers, domestic workers, security guards—people living on daily wages. Waiting in court means losing a day’s income. Missing work could mean losing their job entirely.

The legal process demands patience, but for them, survival cannot wait. When hearings are postponed or stretched over months, most give up. They choose the certainty of earning their next meal over the uncertainty of pursuing justice. The legal system fails to recognize this cruel reality: justice delayed is justice abandoned. And those who abandon justice are never the rich—they are always the poor.

The Way Forward

Addressing these issues requires fundamental systemic reform. Legal aid services must be strengthened, and a network of trained social workers should be created to coordinate legal strategies on the ground. Courts must adopt a more humane approach to demolition matters, ensuring urgent hearings that prevent injustice, rather than rubber-stamping evictions.

Pro bono legal practitioners need better institutional support. They fight not just legal battles but also emotional and logistical ones, often without resources. There must be structured engagement, financial backing, and a recognition that the work they do is essential for upholding the dignity of the marginalized.

Law School Clinics can play a transformative role in supporting long-term legal empowerment, particularly in the context of demolition matters. Proactive legal awareness campaigns in slum communities—focused on critical rights, procedural safeguards, and practical guidance for engaging with legal counsel—can significantly strengthen the agency of affected residents. Moreover, student members can meaningfully contribute through legal research, case documentation, and preparatory work, thereby easing the burden on pro bono lawyers.  This can potentially enhance the overall quality of representation – with lawyers able to focus on other critical aspects. With the right orientation, these collaborations can bridge the gap between legal education and access to justice, and contribute to the society.

Until these reforms take place, pro bono litigation in demolition cases will remain an uphill battle—one where the weak continue to lose. Their struggle is not just for shelter but for dignity. It is time the legal system acknowledges that dignity is not a privilege. It is a right.

(Talha Abdul Rahman is an Advocate on Record at the Supreme Court of India. He is a graduate of Nalsar University of Law and a postgraduate from the University of Oxford as a Shell Chevening Scholar. He is an advocate for human rights, especially access to justice, and has been at the forefront of significant litigation involving the rights of women, the rights of minorities, and the right to privacy. His organization works extensively on human rights issues, including housing, citizenship, bail, and equality.

Views expressed by the author in this blog are his own and do not represent the views of Justice Adda.)