On Independence Day, Gurugram residents seek the freedom to be

They believe problems of infrastructure, safety and social stigma come together to curtail individual freedoms in many ways.

Despite Gurugram’s claim of being a ‘Millennium City’, residents say they aren’t free to live their lives as citizens in a truly world-class city of the “free” should be able to. Problems of infrastructure, safety and social stigma combine in Gurugram to curtail the freedoms of individuals in many ways.

Cities across the country are bathed in the Tricolour on the occasion of Independence Day, and Gurugram is no different. (Diwakar Prasad/ HT Photo)

On Monday, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs placed Gurugram at 88 in its Ease of Living Index, indicating a generally poor quality of life for its residents. The staple problems of poor water, power, health care, and governance all act as hindrances to citizens’ personal experiences of freedom. However, there are other, more subtle ways in which the individual independence is curtailed.

This Independence Day, Hindustan Times looks at three domains of city life where Gurugram can do with some more freedom.

Freedom to Play

Gurjeet Singh (14), and a few of his friends had to give up their favourite sport, football, after their playground—the park in Sector 56—partook in a massive plantation drive two months ago and dotted the flat space where they played with plants.

Subsequently, they went to the other side of the park to play, but residents soon complained of the ball damaging the new saplings. Not long after, the local RWA told them to stop playing there altogether. They tried to play badminton, but now they just stay indoors.

“In badminton, a maximum of only four players can play at any point. Football doesn’t have those restrictions. Six players a side or 12 players a side, football is more accommodating. After we were told to not play football, we had to wait for 20-25 minutes before the next lot could play; playing in the park was no longer fun and within a short span we left venturing outside to play altogether,” Gurjeet said.

It is not only parks where children are feeling restricted. Vidhur Kumar (12), a resident of Sector 47, said he and his friends used to play cricket on a vast vacant plot. Soon, nearby residents started complaining of the ball damaging their window panes.

Vidhur said that to address the concern they modified the game’s rules—hitting the ball outside the vacant plot would be leave the batsman “out”. However, this solution was temporary.

“A leading edge would result in the ball sailing against the intended direction. While we did not break any window panes or objects, residents would find an excuse—that the ball’s in their house again—to make a noise. We continued to play despite this, then one day they put swings there and fenced the boundary,” Vidhur said.

Left with no space to play, he and his friends had to quit their daily exercise and restricted themselves indoors.

Mukta Naik, an urban planner and a senior researcher at the Centre for Policy Research, said, “It is ironic that in a state, such as Haryana, which produces so many athletes, the cities are not built to allow children to play. Sports are vital for a child’s development. As per a developed master plan, residential sectors need to have dedicated playing areas for children. In Gurugram, gated areas do not provide access to their parks to all children. Even the design of existing ones doesn’t encourage indulging in any sports or games.”

Residents said that the parks need to be clearly demarcated or fenced to ensure that people from all age brackets have access.

“If a residential area has two parks then one should be reserved for the elderly and the other can be used by children. In case there is only one park, then it should be divided equally, and either fenced by a wall or barricaded to ensure there is a clear division and people from all age brackets have access to the common facility,” Vinayak Kumar, a resident of Sector 47, said.

Freedom to Walk

Despite its ambitions of being a world-class city, Gurugram’s residents find it hard to move within the city on foot owing to lack of pedestrian infrastructure. Residents and experts emphasized that the condition of walkways and footpaths is extremely poor, if at all they are present in an area.

Sarika Panda Bhatt, a Gurugram-based transport and road safety expert, said that the city is built only for vehicles, particularly private vehicles. “This leaves out many vulnerable users, such as those travelling by foot or cycles,” Bhatt said.

She explained that movement within the city on foot can be challenging due to multiple, interconnected reasons. First is poor built form, i.e., the condition of roads, absence of walkable pavements and so on. The second is lack of administrative will to improve this infrastructure, and third is security concerns, as a result of which walking on the streets is rendered unsafe. These restrictions on everyday movement hinder one’s experience of freedom.

In many areas, residents find it hard to access basic services without vehicles.

Pishorilal Amonker, a senior citizen residing in Sushant Lok 1, said that he has to ride a scooter to even purchase staple items such as bread and soap. “The conditions of roads is such that walking on them over a long distances is impossible,” he said.

Because of safety concerns, women and children remain dependent on male members of the family to travel. “Even for short distances that are walkable, women rely on men to drop them places. This curtails their freedom,” Bhatt said, calling for an overhaul of the city’s footpaths and walkways.

“Indeed, one can say that without the freedom to walk, one is not really free,” she said.

Freedom to be single

Shambhavi Kumar (25) moved to Gurugram in 2016 to start work as an industrial psychologist. For the first few days of her arrival, she planned to stay at a low-cost guesthouse and made an advance booking. However, when she reached the guesthouse near DLF CyberHub, one of the most developed areas in the city that attracts talent from across the country, she was denied her room on grounds that she was “living alone” and “could be a headache for the management”.

“I had just moved to a new city and didn’t know anyone,” Kumar said. For days after that she looked for an apartment, but was denied one as landlords didn’t want a woman “living alone”. “They said I could live with my family or my sister. They weren’t even okay with living with a friend,” she recalled.

Manju Poddar, a woman who rents a portion of her home in a gated society, explained the bias quite plainly. “Two girls used to stay here one year ago and they created such a mess. They would play loud music on Sunday afternoons and would invite boys over,” she said, adding that she only rents to married couples now.

For most single people in the city–men and women alike–finding an apartment is an uphill task, as is getting entry to a nightclub or pub.

“Remaining single is a choice. But in this city, there is a lot that single people have to go through by the simple virtue of being unmarried,” said Harshit Singh (30), a resident of DLF Phase 2 who was recently denied entry into a bar because he wasn’t “accompanied by a woman”.

Recently, pubs on MG Road had refused to entertain women patrons unless they were accompanied by “their husbands”.

Tanushree Chatterjee, a resident of Nirvana Country, said, “My friend and I recently went for a vacation and were almost mugged. When we came back, people just said we should have taken a man along.”