Home Away from Home... A Journey too Far

By Rohan Chavan

Is it too much to ask in Mumbai to have the house of your dreams, making your life better and more comfortable? Leave the affordability aside, even if someone is willing and able to pay the price, is it fair to not let an individual have a fair chance of getting a place to stay? These are some of the questions that have personally affected me in the last couple of months.

After spending almost 10 years in the Army, I decided to hang my uniform and moved out last year in August. I travelled around the country for interesting gigs and finally shifted to Mumbai last month.

After securing a job, my bigger quest began when I started house hunting. It certainly looked like a hunt as it brought its challenges. As a person who served in the Armed forces and who’s used to getting designated accommodation subjected to seniority roll and local guidelines, finding a suitable house on my own, and getting it on rent was altogether a new experience.

I started getting a reality check of life and was taken aback by the mind-boggling rents, the terms and conditions and discrimination by the gated communities. The first thing any broker would ask me was, ‘Aap ka pura nam?’ Indirectly asking my surname to find out my religion. It will then be followed up with questions like, ‘Aap Single hai ya family ke sath? Vegetarian hai ya nahi? (Whether you are single or with family? Are you a vegetarian or not?). In my case, these discriminatory practices were restricted to my marital status and food choices only as my religion and caste identity insulated me from another layer of discrimination.

I saw around 15–20 houses, every house visit followed an interview and after some harrowing instances, I finally found a place to call home. However, this was not enough, there were several background checks and personal meetings, and then only the owners were satisfied and rented the apartment to me.

One of my friends said, “Haan toh isme kya hai.. Ye toh sabke sath hota hai Mumbai me” (What’s the big deal, this happens with everyone trying to rent an apartment). It’s not just Mumbai, one of my female friends, who is a journalist in Delhi, has been asked to give her full name, in an attempt to find out the caste. Her marital status was another factor in her finding it difficult to get a good house. Another friend narrated how her northeastern identity was a big question when she tried to find a house in a posh south Delhi locality.

If a person like me, coming from a middle class background, who has already served in a reputed organisation has to go through so much, that too in my own state, I can’t imagine what would be the plight of those who are completely new to a metropolitan city like Mumbai.

This makes me wonder that despite all the development, have we evolved as a society? Whether our society at present has just accepted this kind of discrimination? and that we should live by it?

There have been various studies on rampant discrimination in housing, such as this article by Article 14 or this one by Reuters. 

What does the law say about it?

There have been laws on rent agreements like the new Model Tenancy Act formed by the Union government in 2021 or the laws enacted by states like Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. All of these acts deal mainly with regulating rent agreements and resolving disputes over the same. But are there any laws that make discrimination in private property renting unlawful? There are fundamental rights under articles 14, 15, 19 and 21 of the constitution, which makes any kind of discrimination unlawful. But does it apply to discrimination in housing?

Lawyer and legal academic Gautam Bhatia in his article ‘Let’s talk about housing discrimination’ argues that Article 15 (2) of the constitution can be used as a principle against discrimination in housing. But still, there are no clear directions in our laws against discrimination in housing which has been normalised in society.

Then I thought of checking whether there are any laws across the globe addressing these issues. And this is what I found from some of the leading economies and one of the most demographically diverse countries.

USA (Fair Housing Act)

In the world’s oldest democracy, discrimination in sales and rentals of houses has been a major issue. People have been subject to discrimination based on their race or colour for a long time. To counter this the US Congress enacted the Fair Housing Act in 1968, which made it unlawful to make housing unavailable to people because of their race or colour, religion, sex, familial status or disability. This gave individuals an instrument to fight discrimination in housing. As per law any individuals who feel that they have been subject to discrimination or illegal housing practices, may file a complaint with the Department of Housing and Urban Development or file their lawsuit in courts.

European Union (Race Equality Directive)

The European Union doesn’t have any equivalent to the US Fair Housing Act, but it has the Race Equality Directivewhich mentions discrimination on grounds of race and ethnic origin is prohibited while providing access to goods and services which are available to the public, including housing. Though these directives are not implemented by all member states and those member states who have implemented them are facing fair share of challenges in the implementation of the same.

UK (Equality Act 2010)

Similarly in the UK to act against the larger malaise of discrimination in society, the Equality Act 2010 was brought in which included discrimination when buying or renting an apartment against the law. Under this act, any individual who has been treated unfairly can file a complaint in court against the other person.

Singapore (Ethnic Integration Policy — EIP)

As per the official statement of the government of Singapore, ‘The Ethnic Integration Policy (EIP) is put in place to preserve Singapore’s multi-cultural identity and promote racial integration and harmony. Though this policy is implemented only in Housing Development Board colonies, built by the Singapore government, it plays a major role in maintaining social harmony in the society and is one of the first major steps taken by the government in rebuilding Singapore.

Discrimination in private rental is a global phenomenon, a report examining discrimination by private renters by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) states rental discrimination in Australia is increasing every year. With the ever growing informal housing sector and the polarising nature of society all across, some people will keep on finding it difficult to get a house of their liking and suitability.

In my personal opinion, the government has no business in controlling who I should let stay in my house and who I should not, at the end of the day it’s my personal choice. We want the state to stay as far away as possible from our homes, and our personal lives, though in present times that’s not been the case, as in the state of Uttarakhand the state has started coming inside our bedrooms. But can we keep allowing society to run this way, where people from a certain section (based on their religion, caste, life practices etc) have to give up on their basic rights?
 
The way Forward

This is where government intervention plays a part in not just maintaining the social fabric of the society but also giving all citizens equal opportunities to live their lives the way they want.

For instance, like the Singapore government’s Ethnic Integration Policy, the government can start allotting houses under government funded housing schemes not just based on financial status but also based on societal status by allotting a certain percentage of houses for not just minorities of that particular area but also for single males/females. Through this, the government can show its intent in making housing not just affordable but non-discriminatory for all.

On the other hand, even after the enactment of the Fair Housing Act, where the government used its coercive power the US is still showing a record number of housing discrimination complaints. We will need to devise newer ways and means to tackle this situation. We don’t want the state to use its coercive power in our personal properties. As people react to incentives, one of the ways can be to provide tax relief or monetary incentives to any private property owner lending/selling property to people from minorities, single males/females, etc who generally face the brunt of these discriminatory practices. A similar step has been taken under the Dr Ambedkar Scheme for Social integration through Inter Caste Marriage where such couples are given monetary incentives of upto 2.5 lacs.

Similarly, a person providing his property continuously for a long duration can be incentivised to buy newer properties or he can be given tax relief over rent earned after a certain long period.

I understand different cities will have their own set of challenges, therefore no one single law will fit the bill for all. Also, economic incentives may not be the only solution, we will have to look after the problem of discrimination in society at large. But at least we can start with some guidelines like the one mentioned above.

In India with the kind of political and social atmosphere we have seen in present times, the situation doesn’t look to be getting better. Therefore a policy intervention at this point will be the right step towards bringing inclusivity in the society. And for the same, rather than using the coercive power of the state by forcing people to behave in a certain manner, incentivising them to change in behaviour could be a better way to deal with a delicate issue like this.

Rohan Chavan is currently a student of the GCPP (Advanced Public Policy) Programme. Read the original piece here.