By Tuesday afternoon, all that remained of 75-year-old Rupa Baai's home in Darukhana was a heap of twisted tin sheets, broken utensils, and a cot pushed to the roadside under the harsh summer sun. The frail woman, unwell and barely able to stand for long, sat silently as six bulldozers moved through the narrow lanes of the settlement, flattening hut after hut under heavy police presence. Around her, families scrambled to rescue school bags, ration cards, gas cylinders, and framed photographs before the debris swallowed them.
Residents Left with No Shelter
Her son, Yasin, 40, a daily wage labourer, stood beside the wreckage, staring blankly at what his friends said had been their home for over five decades. “We have nowhere to go tonight,” said helpless residents who had gathered along the road softly, wiping sweat and dust from their faces. Yasin said, “My mother is sick. We asked for some time, some temporary arrangement, but nobody told us where we should go after this.”
Around 500 people living in over 100 huts on Mumbai Port Authority (MbPA) land at Darukhana along New Tank Bundar road were evacuated in one of the largest demolition drives in south Mumbai in recent years. Residents said the operation began in the early hours of Tuesday and continued through the afternoon amid a large deployment of police personnel. None of the family members, except children, slept as they remained busy taking their utensils and furniture out.
Survival Crisis After Demolition
For many families, the immediate crisis after the demolition was not just shelter, but survival through the night. “We and our children have eaten food offered by people around but who will offer us the same tonight or tomorrow,” asked Bulan Sahani, a footwear maker in his forties, and his wife as his family sat beside salvaged furniture piled on the roadside. “We have Aadhaar cards, voter IDs, everything. We have lived here for decades. But when the demolition came, no political organisation, no agency, nobody came to help us legally or even arrange temporary shelter.”
Residents said rents in nearby areas shot up overnight after word spread about the eviction drive. “Earlier, one room would cost Rs 3,000 or Rs 4,000,” said Sunil Bhise, 38, a school bus driver whose hut was demolished. “Now landlords are demanding Rs 8,000 or Rs 9,000 because they know we are desperate. Nobody is ready to rent to us. Families are sitting out in the open in this heat.” Several residents, including elderly people and children, remained on the roadside through the afternoon waiting for food or assistance from volunteers and local groups. Many said they feared sleeping outdoors with their belongings. Sunil and Bulan said people paid money to set up their homes there but while evicting, no one came to rescue.
Legal and Political Context
The demolitions came after notices were issued in April to residents living along New Tank Bundar Road on MbPA land. An earlier demolition attempt on April 28 was stalled following protests by residents. The case was in the court for eight years since 2018, however no one approached court on behalf of the residents.
In the days leading up to Tuesday's drive, politicians across party lines, including MPs Arvind Sawant and Milind Deora, and MLA Mangal Prabhat Lodha, had written to authorities seeking a humane rehabilitation approach and postponement of the action. Activists said many residents were pre-1995 occupants who would ordinarily qualify for rehabilitation under Maharashtra's slum rehabilitation framework, but since the land belongs to the central government-controlled port authority, state rehabilitation policies do not automatically apply.
Official Response and Legal Options
A senior MbPA official said the authority was acting on court orders and clearing encroachments from the area. When asked whether any directions had been issued regarding temporary accommodation for evicted residents, the official did not comment. Advocate Prerak Mehta said the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, was originally intended to remove trespassers from government land, but concerns had repeatedly been raised over its use against long-settled occupants.
He said residents could challenge eviction orders before the city civil court under provisions of the Act, though appeals must be filed within 12 days of the estate officer's order. By evening, however, legal provisions offered little comfort to families still searching for a place to sleep.
