Worli Fort

The Worli Fort is an ancient British fort in Worli area in Bombay, India. The fort, often mistakenly referred to as being built by the Portuguese, was actually built by the British around 1675. The fort, built on the Worli hill, overlooked the Mahim Bay at a time the city was made up of just seven islands. It was used as a lookout for enemy ships and pirates.

The upkeep of the fort has been impossible due to its inaccessibility, as the roads leading to it are completely blocked by illegal hutments that have cropped up over the years, only to be overlooked by the local authorities for the sake of electoral gain and bribes paid for allowing illegal constructions. The fort is completely in ruins today and a slum has enveloped the edifice, making it a den for illegal activities like the brewing of illicit liquor within its confines. A bell tower peeps out of the ruins and the ramparts are used to dry clothes. Historians have often called for the protection of the area but their efforts have fallen on deaf ears. This in spite of an NGO claiming to have adopted the Worli Village, where the fort is located.

One ray of hope is the new Bandra-Worli sea link that will skirt around the Worli peninsula, bringing the fort back into the public eye, and hopefully, will lead to some action from the government.



Worli Fishing Village

Over two thousand years ago, Mumbai was an archipelago of seven islands, inhabited by the kolis. These tribal fisherfolk still live here in tightly knit communities that the passing centuries have scarcely touched.



The best place to see them is in the 600-year-old Worli Fishing Village that stands on a sliver of land jutting into the sea. Plunge into one of its winding gullies and you will instantly be assailed by the smell of drying fish, and colourful koli women, their dark skins offset by chunky tribal jewellery. At the end of the village is a small Portuguese fort with remnants of an old armoury, soldiers' barracks and thick ramparts. Before the Raj, when Portugal ruled Mumbai, this was a strategic vantage point to counter attacks from the sea.


Unite against the terror, at least


Not withstanding homilies from assorted politicians, the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition included, what a bruised and angry people would like to see is concrete evidence of a firm response to the latest jehadi challenge in Mumbai. After each massacre of innocent civilians, the same old cacophony is heard from almost the same old commentators, critics and talking heads on myriad television channels.

India, they tell you, has become a soft State, the ISI-sponsored outfits have their collaborators and agents in the local population, that the intelligence agencies have failed in cracking the conspiracy before it was too late and so on and so forth.

After expending their vocal energies for a few days, everything is forgotten even as the media and governments move on to the next big crisis be it over an internal revolt over disinvestment or some other natural or man-made calamity.

The point is that nothing seems to be done to counter the terror factories of Pakistan. Indeed, even as we write these lines, the jehadis might be plotting their next move, trying to kill completely innocent men, women and children in the name of Islam in some part of this country.

And the guardians of the Indian State in a most cynical display of paralysis of will would be twiddling their thumbs, plotting their own little conspiracies to prolong their lien on power by underhand means be it through unilateral caste reservations or the sack of an eminent cardiologistadministrator from the premier research and referral medical hospital. We, the ordinary people, it would seem, are condemned to pay for the follies of our rulers.

Having said that let us spell out yet again the barest minimum that ought to be done to blunt the challenge the rogue regime in Islamabad poses to the prevalence of peace in our country. To begin with, when it comes to terror, let politicians stop playing the blame-game. They can be partisan in all other matters but not while fighting terror. L.K. Advani?s initial reaction to the Mumbai serial blasts was cynical.

For someone who as the Home Minister had not acquitted himself well in the fight against jehadis to accuse the Government of failure smacked of sheer hypocrisy. He would have carried conviction before his party wielded power in New Delhi. Not after that six-year lacklustre Congress-like rule by the NDA. In short, a bipartisan approach in fighting terror alone can convince the agents of death and gore that India?s resolve in eliminating their threat is unshakable and unshaken.

Two, do not mistake the fight against terror with an assault on the Muslim minority. While not every Indian Muslim is a terrorist but every terrorist is indeed a Muslim. The local agents and collaborators of the ISI outfits are invariably Muslims. So every time the authorities haul up terrorist suspects do not rise in their defence in the mistaken belief that you are serving some higher principles of justice and equity.

No, you may be only providing succour to the anti-nationals. It is instructive to recall the reaction of secularist politicians when a few years ago the NDA Government banned the Students? Islamic Movement of India. From the Congress Party to the Samajwadi Party everyone expressed sympathy for SIMI despite concrete evidence of its anti-national activities.

In fact, the muted reaction of secular leaders whenever jehadis attack India is most insulting to a majority of Indian Muslims. It implies that the entire community harbours sympathy for the terrorists. It is churlish of `akhbari? leaders like Sitaram Yechury to be more concerned about the benefit that might accrue to the BJP from attacks like the one in Mumbai two days ago than to be bothered about ensuring that the UPA Government takes concrete steps to switch off the tap of Pak terror. Such myopic leadership cannot counter terror, for sure. And ought to be consigned to its natural habitat in the dustbin of history.

Further, and most important, empower the police and intelligence agencies. Give them what it takes to penetrate various terrorist modules in Aurangabad and Nasik, in Mumbai and Lucknow, Delhi and Sringar. Learn from the British experience in fighting the IRA. Or from the Israeli experience in fighting the combined might of the petro dollars and religious fundamentalism.

Unless you do what it takes to fight terror, we have no doubt innocent citizens in Mumbai and Srinagar or elsewhere in the country would continue to fall prey to the mayhem of the jehadis. Of course, the first step in the fight against terror is the expression of unity across the entire political spectrum. Fight it you must. And fight it within the four walls of the statute.

But wherever the statute is found wanting, or is exploited by terrorists for their own benefit, change it to make the task of the police and other agencies that much easier. Deleting POTA was a huge mistake. No quarter ought to be shown to the enemies of the Indian people. Period.

Article from www.samachar.com



Why Mumbai choked

Great damage has been done to Mumbai in the name of development and on the pretext of providing houses to the poor. As a result, the city lost its natural checks and balances against disasters.
Newly built multi-storeyed residential buildings behind an expanse of slums in Mumbai. Town planners blame land reclamation and misuse of no-development zones as reasons that blocked the city's lungs during the week-long deluge.
AT the very start, claims of the Maharashtra government with regard to the nature of the catastrophe itself need to be exposed. There have been cloudbursts in the past but Mumbaikars have never faced a situation like this before, so the government cannot blame the crisis on unprecedented rainfall. That is unacceptable. Years of bad development have been exposed by excess rain. The writing has been on the wall for a long time. So whether it was 95 cm or 50 cm of rain is not the issue. It has nothing to do with the quantum of water. It has everything to do with the faulty planning of the city. In any case, disaster management planning is supposed to be for 1.25 to 1.5 metres of rain within 24 hours.
Why did this happen? Basically flooding happens in any city adjacent to the sea for two reasons. During the high tide surplus water hits the city. If it rains at the same time, the force of the surplus rainwater is blocked by the high tide. At times the sea even enters the city, and the domains of sea and land become a grey area. Let us look at the sea component first. Every city has its share of dissipation spaces - wetlands, wastelands, mangroves and salt-pan lands. These act like sponges and take the pressure out of the high tide. In the past 10 years each of these has been destroyed systematically in Mumbai. Mangroves have given way to golf courses. Reclamation has been permitted on a wide scale.

The mouth of the river Mithi has been reclaimed under the guise of providing the Bandra-Worli sea link. This sea link could have been built without reclaiming 41 acres (16.4 hectares), but this reclamation was thrust on the scheme. This has actually closed the mouth of the Mithi, in a way strangling the river, and has filled in most of Mahim bay.
Or take the case of the Sewri-Nhava Sheva link. This will take over a significant part of the Wadala-Sewri mangroves. The authorities could have changed the alignment and saved the mangroves but they refused to. At Cuffe Parade, mangroves have been destroyed by encroachers and slums with the consent of builders and politicians. The same is the case in Versova, Oshiwara, Lokhandwala complex, Charkop, Gorai and Madh island. It is happening all over the city's coastline. The State government and the municipal administration are involved in this. My theory is that Mumbai is being strangulated. I use that word deliberately. Whenever the authorities get environmental clearance for any infrastructure project, they use that project to create more land so that this extra land could be allotted to builders and more money made. That is the usual procedure.

It is a carefully planned strategy. It is a transition from wetland to wasteland. From the domain of the sea you create land that is first deemed wasteland. Then you change its status to a no-development zone. Then you say `it's a no-development zone' but it is contiguous to development areas so you allow small construction. Then it is easy to take the next step and allow non-polluting industry like software. And then there is no turning back. In July, there was a circular asking for objections from across the board for all "no-development" lands to be made available for development albeit for a smaller floor space index (FSI). The plan could be justified by saying that it was a small FSI and it would not make any difference. After that, you increase the FSI and then you raise it to unlimited FSI. That is how the transition from sea to land occurs. This has happened in Chedda Nagar in northeast Mumbai when salt-pans were filled in to create land. Because of actions such as this the sea is thwarted.
Under town planning rules, in the case of cities that do not have dissipation spaces there are buffer zones. Mumbai had the advantage of having excellent buffer zones in the form of 60,000 ha of wetland in Vasai-Virar and Bhayendar, just outside the northern outer limits of the city. These could absorb the effects of the sea. So even assuming that Mumbai's development went out of hand these regions would still have acted as a buffer. But the greed did not stop there. Permission was given to urbanise Vasai-Virar and 20,000 ha of wetlands were converted for urbanisation. Another possible buffer was New Bombay but even the wetlands and low-lying areas of this region were taken over for development. In fact the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust itself is a major reclaimed area. Perhaps, on the grounds of infrastructure that could be justified, but, along with that, about 7,000 ha of land is proposed to be reclaimed for the new Special Economic Zone. So no buffer space is left for the surplus water of the sea to go. The sea has no alternative but to hit the land.












The Mithi river, which flows along and under the runway of the Mumbai International Airport.

NOW let us look at the land aspect. Initially, this newly created land from the sea was kept as no-development zone but in the past one year or so it has been opened up for development. There were other no-development zones on virgin lands and on hills and mudflats. These were also opened up for urbanisation. This means concretisation of these lands. If you concretise land, then the soil is unable to soak in the water. This is a double loss because the underground acquifers are also not regenerated.
The city's development plan has earmarked lands for gardens and playgrounds within the city limits. These are being de-reserved at a phenomenal rate. As Chief Minister, Sharad Pawar de-reserved 285 plots; Manohar Joshi 300 plots; and Narayan Rane, in his eight-month rule, de-reserved about 180 plots, one of which covered 660 acres (264 ha) in Mankhurd (an area that was severely affected by flooding with water rising to 12 feet). Vilasrao Deshmukh continued the trend. Sushilkumar Shinde de-reserved 67 plots. All these put together would perhaps amount to almost 50 per cent of the space for amenities. On paper, the development plan's amenity spaces ratio is 0.2 acres per 1,000 population. Of this, 82 per cent is taken over by slums so that the actual ratio is 0.03 acres per 1,000 population. This is the lowest in the world. By Indian standards it should be 4 acres per 1,000 population. If you take international standards it is 12 to 14 acres per 1,000 population. The other metropolitan cities, Delhi, Chennai and Kolkata, have a ratio of about 4 acres each.
The target in Mumbai for the next 20 years was to improve the existing situation and have a ratio of 0.4 acres per 1,000 population. But actually it is dropping. When a plot is reserved, it has no commercial value since nothing can be built on it. Its price is zero. But when it is de-reserved, the price shoots up to the level of land price prevailing in the area. It is a major source of income for politicians. When more FSI is given on that plot its worth increases further. So with an investment of a lakh of rupees you can make Rs.20-50 crores. That is what is fuelling the greed.
THE other policy that is under attack by developers is the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ). It is a zone where no construction is permitted but the CRZ rule is such that if there is a road running near the coast, development is permitted on the non-coastal side of the road. So development plans show roads, which are proposed but actually never constructed. The new development plans started in 1992, around the time when the judgment regarding CRZ rules was given. The first development plan showed a ring road almost touching the sea and encircling the city. This does not exist in reality but it was inserted into the plan so that wherever they wanted to get exemptions for construction they would actually build a road, say that it was in the original plan and then proceed to carry out the so-called permitted development near the road and violate the CRZ. Slum redevelopment is possible in the CRZ areas within the present rules. If the CRZ rules are relaxed or waived completely, builders will benefit tremendously.
An all-party delegation met successive Prime Ministers to convince them of the need to scrap the CRZ rules. Needless to say, the builder-politician-bureaucrat-underworld nexus was engineering every move. The maximum damage to the city was done during the Bharatiya Janata Party-Shiv Sena regime. Two major actions taken in 1997 were the slum re-development scheme and the old and dilapidated buildings reconstruction scheme. The slum scheme has a unique position among such schemes worldwide. If this scheme just said that land, which is occupied by slums, is declared as valid for slum re-development then it is understandable. But the Mumbai scheme is such that vacant land, which is a garden or a playground, has been declared as a slum. This is purely for the benefit of builders. This scheme, under the garb of providing free housing to slum-dwellers, has taken over all the vacant land and incorporated it into slum development with a 2.5 FSI where the normal FSI permitted is 1.

Such were the powers given to the slum re-development authority that if a builder came to it and asked for some vacant plot to be included in the scheme the authority could do so. Incidentally, it is worth noting that the Chief Minister is the Chairman of the Slum Re-Development Authority and also that of the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA). The Chief Minister also holds the Urban Development portfolio. The present Chief Minister is also the Housing Minister.
Old and dilapidated buildings have been taken over by builders because they have unlimited FSI. There have been cases where the FSI granted to builders has been 9, 11, 12 and even 16. This is granted by fraud. First old buildings had 2.0 FSI. Then they came up with an odd norm that said that 2.5 FSI or 50 per cent FSI in excess of that which is required to accommodate the existing tenants. Which means that the moment you increase the number of tenants you get more FSI in the garb of accommodating existing tenants and you get 50 per cent over and above that.
So manufacturing bogus tenants became the order of the day. There have been cases of buildings in south Mumbai where without accommodating a single tenant a building of 45 floors has come up. But on the record, this entire building is supposed to be a tenant rehabilitation building. There are 1,300 such properties in the city, which have been developed with bogus tenants. They have deprived the Centre and the State of at least Rs.20,000 crores. How? When you remove a tenant and show a bogus tenant, he is in fact a buyer of your flat. So when he buys a flat he pays taxes - capital gains and others. But if you are getting it as a tenant then you are getting it in lieu of your old house so you do not show any payment. The buyer does make payments but in cash. He does not pay stamp duty because tenants are exempted from this. The State loses this money and it loses it knowingly.

And what does the Centre do?

The BJP-led National Democratic Alliance government exempted builders who owned property of more than one acre from paying income tax. Then came the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government and its Finance Minister P. Chidambaram argued that if owners of large properties could be exempted why should those with smaller properties be left out. And so they also got exemption.
One of the reasons for the Congress' return to power in the State was its promise to fight this development policy. As soon as Vilasrao Deshmukh assumed office as Chief Minister, he appointed the Godbole Committee for good governance and the Tinaikar Committee to go into the issue of slums and old and dilapidated buildings. In his report, Tinaiker clearly says that the slum scheme needs to be stopped immediately because it is of the builder, for the builder and by the builder. If a senior and honest bureaucrat like Tinaikar, who has been Additional Chief Secretary to the State government, Housing Secretary, Municipal Commissioner and chief of the Housing Board, says so, should not his advice have been taken? The government accepted his report but did not implement it. The Godbole Committee made a fervent appeal saying if there is to be good governance and if catastrophes are to be prevented there should be a permanent commission at the State-level to monitor and guide the process of urbanisation.
Again, the committee's recommendations were shown as accepted, but the government compromised with the builder-underworld nexus and pushed the slum scheme and the unlimited FSI scheme with gusto. As far as these destructive schemes are concerned, all the major political parties are culprits. The slum re-development scheme threw up a major problem of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) wherein the TDR generated on one plot can be used on another. Because of this about two crore TDRs have been loaded on the suburbs of Mumbai without even checking if the infrastructure can take that or not.
The five years of the BJP-Sena rule were crucial since that was when the destructive development policy was put into action. The Congress has continued it with great vigour.

CHANDRASHEKHAR PRABHU


Worlikar's want to alter sea-link plan




Citizens groups have thrown up two alternatives to one of the link bridges that join the Bandra Worli Sea Link to the mainland.

They are opposed to the current plan to join the sea-link to Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan Road, arguing that a bridge at that location would lead to congestion at Worli sea face, making it difficult for people to use the promenade for recreation.

One suggestion is to construct the link bridge at Mahakali Road and take it all the way to Dr Annie Besant Road. The other is to link the sea-link to Worli Dairy.

However, with the first phase of the construction nearing completion, Ramakant Jha, executive director of the Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation (MSRDC), has dismissed the first suggestion. Though he did not have any objections to the second, he said the citizens’ groups would have to convince the government.

Jha said, "I agree the bridge would make the Worli sea face crowded, but I cannot change the plans at this stage."

Moreover, he added that one of the proposed advantages of the sea-link is the decongestion of Annie Besant Road, an important arterial route for the city. "What is the point of having a bridge to Mahakali Road and Annie Besant Road when the purpose is to decongest the latter?" he asked.

Moreover, Mahakali has a channel for fishermen as well as a Coast Guard base, which has sensitive equipment."We got the environmental clearance because our plans do not affect the livelihood of the fishermen in any way. The bridge the residents are asking for would destroy their fishing business. Also, building any road near the Coast Guard base is prohibited," Jha said.

While Jha said he had no problem with the second plan, it would entail an additional construction of 1.6 km of the sea-link, which at 1999 prices would cost about Rs 160 crore.

It would also require new clearances from the government as well as the environment committee.
"This scheme is part of the second phase of the project for which clearance is still pending," Jha said.

Meanwhile, the Worli Woods citizens group is planning meetings to press their demands. They intend giving a petition to the chief minister with the signatures of prominent people, including Police Commissioner M N Singh, Director General of Police Subhash Malhotra and former police commissioner Julio Ribeiro.

Project Background

Bandra Worli Sea Link Project has been one of the most highly recommended project of all the transport studies done for the metropolitan region during the last forty years.
At present, Mahim causeway is the only link connecting western suburbs to island city of Mumbai. The existing north south western corridor is highly congested and during the peak hours results in a bottleneck at Mahim Causeway.
Vehicular traffic admeasuring about 1,20,000 PCU travels on the Mahim causeway everyday and during peak hours and it takes about forty minutes to travel from Mahim causeway to Worli, a distance of about 8 km.

Connecting island and suburbs of mumbai

Construction of the project link will provide an additional fast moving outlet from the island city to the western suburbs & thereby providing much needed relief to the congested Mahim Causeway. This link will also form a part of the western freeway.

Project Location

* The project starts from the Interchange at Mahim i.e. intersection of Western Express Highway and Swami Vivekanand road at Bandra and connects to Worli at Worli end with overall length of 5.6 kms for the entire project.

* A cloverleaf interchange at Mahim intersection and a flyover at the Lovegrove intersection have been proposed as part of this project to enhance the faster and safe traffic dispersal.


City by the sea


Sign of the times

Mumbai is a young town: its development into the city we know today started in the 1600s. The site of the modern city was originally an archipelago of seven islands: Colaba, Mazagaon, Old Woman’s Island, Wadala, Mahim, Parel and Matunga-Sion. The earliest known settlers were the Kolis, tribal fishermen whose descendants still exist in scattered coastal communities (notably the Worli fishing village in the northern suburbs). The islands came under the tutelage of Ashoka’s Buddhist Mauryan Empire from about the 3rd century BC.

From the 6th to the 13th centuries, Hindu dynasties such as the Chalukyas and, later, the Siharas were ascendant, a legacy still visible in the carved caves on Elephanta Island and the Walkeshwar temple on Malabar Point (both dedicated to Shiva, a Hindu deity). Islam appeared in 1343, when the sultanate of Gujarat annexed the archipelago—the dramatic Haji Ali mosque on Mahim Bay (present midtown Mumbai) dates from this period.


Making maps

By the 16th century, Europe’s imperial powers were taking an interest in the subcontinent. Portugal made the first move. In 1508, Francis Almeida dropped anchor, and dubbed the deep natural harbour “Bom Bahia” (“Good Bay”). An early attempt at conquest of the sultanate failed, but in 1534 a 21-ship Portuguese invasion forced Bahadur Shah, the Gujarati ruler, to cede control to Portugal.

Mumbai was not a priority for the Portuguese—they regarded it as a way station for control of the spice trade, further east. But the spreading of Christianity was enthusiastically pursued by Portuguese Jesuits: the Kolis were subject to both forcible conversion and intermarriage. An inquisition was established in India in 1560. Churches (St Andrews, at Bandra, is one of the few Portuguese-style churches remaining) and forts (at Sion, Mahim, Bandra and Bassein, on the mainland to the north) were built. Administration of the archipelago was carried out by Garcia da Orta, a vazador (possessor), who rented the islands until his death in 1568, when control passed to his sons. Coconuts and coir (a fibre derived from the coconut palm) were exported on a small scale.


Enter the British


The Fort was first

During the 17th century, Portugal’s imperial significance declined, while Britain’s was on the ascendant. Bom Bahia was included in the dowry of Catherine of Braganza, the king of Portugal’s sister, for her strategic marriage to King Charles II of England in 1661. After some resistance from the Portuguese garrison, the other islands came under British control by 1665, and the name of the tiny port was anglicised to "Bombay".

Like the Portuguese, Mumbai’s new masters had little use for the islands. However, the terms of ownership were favourable: this was Britain’s first proper “colony” in India. The East India Company, which had a monopoly over trade under royal warrant, saw the potential of the fine harbour: its position on the Arabian Sea was convenient for trade routes both east and west. In a canny deal, the company acquired the islands for an annual lease of £10 in 1668, and began to develop the port. Sir George Oxenden, a company man, was appointed the first governor.

At first, the company took a relaxed approach to developing its new prize. Eventually, governor Gerald Aungier (1672-1677) kicked off efforts to turn Mumbai into a trading post to rival the mainland kingdoms. His promises of land holdings and religious freedom attracted skilled workers and merchants—among them Gujaratis, Brahmins, Jews, Armenians, Bohras and, in particular, the Parsis, persecuted elsewhere for their Zoroastrian beliefs. The Parsis, along with the Kolis, were instrumental in defending the islands in 1689-90 when the Siddi, a mainland kingdom, made several attempts to seize Mumbai whenever the British were laid low by cholera and malaria (outbreaks were frequent).


Building up Mumbai

By 1675, Mumbai’s population had reached 60,000 (from 10,000 at the time of Portuguese handover). The East India Company moved its headquarters from Surat to Mumbai in 1687. Construction on the Fort itself started in 1715, under the governorship of Charles Boone, who oversaw the creation of St Thomas Cathedral. Trade in salt, rice, ivory, fabrics, lead, iron and gold grew steadily. Shipbuilding was also established, and Mumbai became a stopover for slave-trade ships. Yet throughout the 18th century, the town remained something of a backwater. Battles and disputes with the neighbouring Maratha kingdoms, which controlled most of western India, meant that Britain’s presence on the subcontinent was tentative.

In 1740 the Marathas seized the island of Salsette (now incorprated into Mumbai's landmass). The British responded by moving native settlements further north in order to expand the port’s defences. Current place names reflect the sites of the (long disappeared) battlements: Apollo Gate, Church Gate and Bazaar Gate, to name a few. Sporadic military conflict and diplomatic manoeuvrings between the British and the Marathas and their allies continued. The British were able to exploit their rivals’ disunity, but they lacked the military advantage. In the Treaty of Salbai of 1782, British control of Mumbai (including Salsette and some other islands) was established in return for giving up land Britain had won on the mainland.

In the gradual run-up to British control of India, Mumbai continued to grow. Land-use laws and housing laws, designed to segregate the British and Indian populations, were established in 1772. In 1777, the city’s first English newspaper, the Mumbai Courier, was published. 1784 saw the completion of the first land reclamation project. The Hornby Vellard (named after William Hornby, the governor), where Breach Candy now stands, joined the main island to Mahim. The first causeway between islands (the Sion Causeway) was completed in 1803. By the turn of the century, the first civil administration outside the control of the East India Company had been founded. Migrants (such as the Kamathis from Andhra Pradesh) fleeing the inter-kingdom wars on the mainland, flowed in, many to find employment in the reclamations.

In 1803, a huge fire devastated much of the settlement, prompting an ordinance in 1812 that stipulated the planning of settlements. With the defeat of the Maratha empire in 1818, the British annexed most of western India and the scene was set for Mumbai’s takeoff as the west coast's trade and communications hub. Under Governor Mountstuart Elphinstone (1819-1827), wealthy residents moved to new neighbourhoods such as Malabar Hill. The completion of the Colaba Causeway between Mumbai and Colaba in 1838 established Colaba as a centre of commerce, and the Cotton Exchange opened there in 1844.

Reclamations and causeway building continued apace, and by the time the Mahim Causeway (between Mahim and Sion) was finished in 1845, the city’s present-day landmass had more or less taken shape. Space, however, remains at a premium in Mumbai. The continuing hunger for land was demonstrated in the 1920, when many investors lost fortunes in speculation surrounding plans for reclamation around Back Bay (now ringed by Marine Drive). Today, Mumbai’s real-estate prices rival those of Tokyo and Hong Kong.


End of the line

The advent of steamships and the railways consolidated Mumbai’s status as India’s trading hub. In 1849, the British government founded the Great Indian Peninsular Railway project. In 1853, a 21-mile track (India's first), built by the East India Company, connected Mumbai to Thane. But the company’s days were numbered: the first war of Indian independence in 1857 was instigated by discontented sepoys (soldiers, mainly from northern India) in the company’s militia. The British government expressed its displeasure at the company’s mismanagement by cancelling its monopoly over trade, and control of Mumbai reverted to the Crown.

With the railways came the cotton trade. The soil on Mumbai's neighbouring mainland was ideal for cultivating the crop, and the first cotton mill opened in 1854. Many more followed, along with an influx of Maharatha labourers. Capitalising on the gap in the cotton supply to Britain created by the American Civil War, cotton merchants ramped up prices: but the boom turned to bust as the war ended. By then, Mumbai’s status as the main trading port between India and Britain was established, and was boosted further by the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869.

A booming economy created problems of overcrowding in the fast-growing city, and slums sprang up around the mills. Under the governorship of Sir Bartle Frere (1862-67), the walls of the old fort were removed, clearing the way for the creation of magnificently overwrought Victorian edifices such as Flora Fountain (1869) and the neo-Gothic Victoria Terminus (1887, pictured above). The Mumbai Port Trust, founded in 1870, oversaw massive expansion of the waterfront. The Mumbai Municipal Corporation was formed to govern infrastructure in 1865, and the city's first stock exchange (forerunner of the Mumbai Stock Exchange) was founded in 1875, with early meetings held under a banyan tree opposite the town hall, still standing in present-day Horniman Circle. Large water-supply projects, including the Vihar Water Works and a series of reservoirs, continued into the 1890s. They have nevertheless proved inadequate to meet the demands of the present-day megalopolis.


Street life

Other elements of the extremes of wealth that still bedevil the city were making themselves felt. The rapid growth of the textile industry accelerated migration to Mumbai during the 1890s, and the city’s overworked infrastructure was unable to cope. Epidemics of plague came on top of already high mortality rates, and industrial waste from the mills made life in the old neighbourhoods increasingly unhealthy. In 1906, the population reached the 1m mark. Authorities responded by founding an agency, the City Improvement Trust, charged with developing new suburbs and road and transport networks. By 1925, electric trains ran into the new northern localities.

Grandiose imperial development of Mumbai continued downtown, with the Indo-Saracenic architectural style replacing the Gothic-revival epitomised by Victoria Terminus. Icons of the style, such as the Taj Mahal Hotel, the General Post Office and the Prince of Wales Museum were completed, and in 1911, to mark the visit of George V and Queen Mary, the foundation stone of the Gateway of India was laid, with the edifice complete by 1924.

Time for a change

AFP

The Mahatma and followers

Despite the grandeur, time was running out for the imperial masters. As the wealthiest city in India, Mumbai was home to the cotton-enriched Indian elite, increasingly dissatisfied with its second-class status under the empire. Many of the leading lights and financiers of the first Indian National Congress (hosted in Mumbai) in 1885 and the subsequent independence movement were wealthy Mumbai-based Parsis, such as Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata, who, legend has it, opened the Taj in 1903 after being denied entry to a British-run hotel.

Mohandas "Mahatma" Gandhi returned to Mumbai from South Africa in 1915, and made Mani Bhavan the base for some of the key points in his long campaign to end British rule. He made his "Quit India" call from the Gowalia Tank Maidan at the base of Malabar Hill in August 1942, at the culmination of the All India Congress Committee meeting. He was arrested soon after. India became independent at midnight on August 15th 1947, and the Gateway of India was the scene of the last departure of British troops when the First Battalion of the Somerset Light Infantry marched through it on February 28th 1948.

During the second world war, Mumbai's harbour was an important link in the supply line for Britain's campaign against Japan. On the afternoon of April 14th 1944, it seemed to the city's inhabitants that the war had come to them when fire broke out aboard the “Fort Stikine”, a merchant ship with a cargo of dried fish, cotton, timber, explosives, ammunition, aeroplane parts and gold bars (to stabilise the sagging wartime rupee). Two massive explosions caused carnage in the harbour: the “Fort Stikine”, more than 20 other ships and many waterfront buildings were destroyed; over 1,000 died; and Mumbai was swept by panic as thousands tried to flee the city. For many years afterwards, gold bars were regularly discovered in the harbour's mud during dredging operations.

After independence, communal tensions began to surface in Mumbai, as job-seeking migrants swelled the population to unprecedented levels. At first, the city was capital of the new state of Mumbai. But in 1960, the state was divided on linguistic grounds into Gujarat (Gujarati-speaking) and Maharashtra (Marathi-speaking), with Mumbai the capital of the latter. Marathas remain the city’s largest ethnic group.

Following the destruction of the Babri Masjid mosque at Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh in December 1992 (over claims that it had been built on the site of the birthplace of Rama, a Hindu deity), the city was swept up in nationwide Hindu-Muslim strife, with over 800 dying in Mumbai in riots that ran into January 1993. On March 12th 1993, a dozen bomb blasts around the city killed more than 300 people, with damaged sites including the Air India building and the Mumbai Stock Exchange. Muslim elements in the local underworld, allegedly funded by Pakistan, were blamed. Further blasts in 2003 (one near Gateway of India) were linked to communal riots in Gujarat.

In 1995, Shiv Sena (after winning power that year in Maharashtra state also, in coalition with the Hindu-nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party) renamed the city "Mumbai", after Mumba Devi, a Koli goddess, as part of a campaign of official renaming of public places. The party’s influence has been tempered somewhat by the victory of the secular centrist Congress Party in state elections in 2000. Congress subsequently won the national elections of 2004, providing a rare instance of political unity between Maharashtra and the nation.

Looking ahead

Mumbai has had to deal with many challenges after independence. The textile industry has declined—and controversy about how to develop land left vacant by the mills dominates the local political scene. In its place has come a new economy based on finance, services, information technology, business process outsourcing, entertainment (epitomised by the "Bollywood" film-making industry), and construction, which boomed through the 1970s and 1980s. The city continues to attract swathes of immigrants from elsewhere in India, Nepal, Pakistan and Bangladesh, with corresponding growth in slums and congestion. As the business heart of the nation, Mumbai epitomises India’s hopes of attaining the tiger status of its east Asian neighbours: thus debate about the city's crumbling infrastructure and poor governance—both of which were starkly underlined by the lack of readiness for and the aftermath of particularly devastating monsoon floods in July 2005 and lack of space for development has reached frantic levels. These issues are now the city's most pressing concerns

Facts and figures

Land area: 437.71 sq km

Population: 12m (Mumbai municipality); 17.7m (Greater Mumbai)

Languages: Marathi, Hindi (the local variant is called Bambaiya Hindi), Gujarati and many other Indian languages. English is widely spoken.

Telephone codes:

Country code: +91

City code: (0)22

Currency:

The Indian currency is the rupee, which is divided into 100 paise. Notes are available in denominations of 5 rupees (no longer printed), 10, 20, 50, 100, 500 and 1000 rupees, coins in 1, 2 and 5 rupees and in 25 and 50 paise.

Business hours:

Shopping hours vary, but most shops in the centre are open six days a week (Monday-Saturday 10am-8pm), and are quietest during weekdays. The hawkers along streets like Colaba Causeway are active until somewhat later. Official business hours are 9:30am to 5:30pm. Banks open 10am-2pm Monday to Friday and 10am-12pm every second Saturday. Post offices are open 9:30am-5:30pm Monday to Saturday.

Numbering:

Particularly when money and data are being discussed, some Indian terminology is commonly used, such as lakh (one lakh = 100,000) and crore (one crore = 10m).

Electricity:

230-240 volts AC, 50 Hz. Three-point round-pin sockets are in use.

Economic profile:

Commerce determined Mumbai’s history. As India's largest trading port, it has long served as the country's gateway: open and welcoming to foreigners, and offering the promise of opportunity to fortune-seekers from the country’s hinterland. Rudyard Kipling, who was born in Mumbai, wrote of the city: “she lent me worth, and gave me right to pride”.

Mumbai's economy took off in the 19th century, when the British annexed western India and the British East India Company was losing its monopoly over trade between Britain and India. Merchants flowed in as restrictions on immigration were loosened. Ships were built to export raw cotton, silk, opium and ivory. In 1854, the city's first cotton textile mill opened, and the boom in cotton trade, sparked in part by the American Civil War which cut off American supplies to Europe, earned Mumbai its reputation as the “Manchester of the East”.

By 1865, Mumbai had 31 banks, 20 insurance companies, and 62 joint stock companies. The first stock exchange was established in 1875. The opening of the Suez Canal in 1869 consolidated the port’s status. Cotton remained an economic bedrock well into the 20th century, which also saw the arrival of an eclectic mix of creative people, leading to the creation of Mumbai’s cosmopolitan culture, and the profusion of the Hindi (so-called “Bollywood”) film industry, the largest in the world.

Today, Mumbai has the buzz of a city on the move. It is the base for India’s leading companies, such as Reliance, Tata and Air India, and its largest banks and financial institutions, such as ICICI Bank, Housing Development and Finance Corporation and Life Insurance Corporation. The Bombay Stock Exchange, which moved from open-outcry to computerised trading in 1995, and the National Stock Exchange, which opened in 1994 are India's top trading floors. The textile industry has given way to the new economy of financial services, call centres and other business process outsourcing services, information technology and entertainment companies. A construction boom has created a new skyline of shopping malls, hotels and office complexes. As the city’s cheerleaders position Mumbai for Asian-tiger status, three concerns override all others: the groaning infrastructure, lack of space and a chronic housing shortage.

Mumbai is an island and restrictions on both new building and rent levels have combined to send real-estate prices to levels rivalling those of Tokyo and Hong Kong and discussion of whether to increase the city’s floor-space dominates local media. Housing shortages as immigrants flow in from all over the subcontinent (population is predicted to reach 27m by 2010) have led to the growth of slums: Dharavi, Asia's biggest slum, sits alongside Bandra, the city’s new centre of business. Poverty afflicts millions. A symbiotic relationship has developed between the city’s elite and the slum-dwellers, many of whom are employed in the domestic sector and in the huge informal economy (which is estimated to contribute between 25% and 40% to Mumbai’s output). In 2005, the biggest debate about the city’s future concerned how to develop 600 acres of land left vacant by former textile mills at midtown.

Mumbai's infrastructure is another problem. Roads are inadequate and the rail system clogged. East-west linkages (current corridors have a north-south bias) are sorely needed. Traffic congestion is especially bad between the airport and the downtown business area. Lobby groups such as Bombay First are trying to encourage companies to relocate to suburbs such as Bandra, and calling for development of satellite towns on the mainland. There are signs that both the state and national governments are prepared to address the problem. Some lobby groups argue that a unified city government (at present, governance is spread across several agencies at state level) is what is needed. Governance and infrastructure problems were both starkly underlined by the lack of readiness for and the aftermath of particularly devastating monsoon floods in July 2005 .

Despite its problems, Mumbai remains India’s biggest business centre and has plenty of potential: the influx of air routes to and from Europe and America is itself evidence of its growing importance as both a tourist destination and a site of investment.



How small we are?





Comapre Earth -2
Originally uploaded by UmeshW.

Comapre Earth- 1
Originally uploaded by UmeshW.






This is Worlikar Zone.....