Journal of Geographic Information System, 2011, 3, 62-84
doi:10.436/jgis.2011.31005 Published Online January 2011 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/jgis)
Urbanization and Quality of Urban Environment Using
Remote Sensing and GIS Techniques in East Delhi-India
Atiqur Rahman¹, Yogesh Kumar1, Shahab Fazal2, Sunil Bhaskaran3
1Department of Geography, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Jamia Millia Islamia University, New Delhi, India
2Department of Geography, Faculty of Science, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India
3Remote Sensi ng an d GI S Division, Dep artment of Envi ro nmental, Geog rap hi c a nd Geol o gi c al Sci e nces,
Lehman College, City University of New York, Bronx, USA
Received November 12, 2010; revised December 14, 2010; accepted December 27, 2010
Abstract
An explosive increase of urban population, practically in all major cities and towns, has the consequent strain
on the existing system manifested in an environmental chaos. The phenomena of accelerated urbanisation is
the main culprit, wherein besides bringing higher standard of living, it has also brought problems, as growth
of dense and unplanned residential areas, environmental pollution, non-availability of services and amenities,
solid waste etc. Remote sensing satellite data is suitable for urban land use mapping to get detail and up-
to-date information for environmental management. Where as GIS helps in developing database system for
urban information, which supports decision making process. Development of digital database on all aspects
of land use and urban planning is the next crucial task for the future in which remote sensing based informa-
tion is going to play a major role. In Delhi, rise in population and growth in economic activity has led to en-
vironmental degradation. With this view an attempt has been made to study the quality of urban environment
in the East district of Delhi, which is experiencing very high urban growth with 98.75% urban population in
2001. For this study Landsat ASTER (MSS) data of year 2001 (15 m Ground resolution), Guide map of the
year 1982 and demographic and environmental data has been used. Eight parameters were selected, which
affect the urban environmental quality, namely built-up area, open spaces, household density, occupancy ra-
tio, population density, accessibility to roads, noise and smell affected area. The study shows that the quality
of environment has been degraded when we compare 1982 and 2003 data. Most of the East district was in a
better state of environment in 1982, but in 2003 things have been changed and now 50% area is in very good,
fair and desirable condition. The public participation and involvement should be encouraged planning and
decisions making for the improvement in better urban environmental quality.
Keywords: Urban i za t io n , U rb a n Env ir onmental Quality, Remote Sensing & GIS, East Delhi-India
1. Introduction
Urban growth all over the world is taking place which is
unequal but the rate of urbanization is very fast in the
developing countries especially in Asia. In 1800 A.D,
only 3% of the world’s population lived in urban centres
and this figure reached to 14% in 1900 and in 2000,
about 47% (2.8 b illion) pe ople were liv ing in urban areas.
India no longer lives in villages and 79 million people
were living in urban areas in India in 1961 but in 2001
about 285 million people resides in urban areas [1]. In
1991, there were 23 metropolitan cities in India [2]
which increased to 35 in 2001 [3] some of the prominent
are Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkatta and Chennai etc. As urban
population increases, the demand of land for various ur-
ban activities also increases. In India the process of ur-
banization gained momentum with the start of industrial
revolution and globalization way back in 1970s. Forests
were cleared, grasslands ploughed or grazed, wetlands
drained and croplands encroached upon under the influ-
ence of expanding cities, yet never as fast as in the last
decade. The main basis of urbanization is the economic
change and in particular the growth of secondary and
tertiary occupation in urban areas [4].

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
63
The high rate of increase in the urban population has
created many problems in the urban areas of Indian cities.
Doubling and tripling of urban population practically in
all major cities and towns and the consequent strain on
the existing system manifested in an environmental
chaos. Every major city of India faces the same prolifer-
ating problems of urban expansion, inadequate housing,
poor transportation system, poor sewerage, erratic elec-
tric supply, insufficient drinking water supplies etc. An
increasing number of trucks, buses, cars, three-wheelers
and motorcycles all spewing uncontrolled fumes, surge
in sometimes-haphazard patterns over city streets jamm-
ed with jaywalking pedestrians, rickshaw, cattle, and
goats. The phenomena of accelerated urbanization is the
main culprit, wherein besides bringing higher standard of
living has also brought problems of growth of dense and
unplanned residential areas, environmental pollution,
non-availability of services and amenities and solid
waste generation and growth of slums. The rapid growth
of Delhi in past decades has resulted in significant de-
crease in the quality of environment. Rise in population
and growth in economic activity has led to environ-
mental degradation in Delhi. Emerging future of Delhi in
the light of its past experiences, current trends, and de-
velopment initiatives is one of the importan t issue which
shows different social and physical factors affecting the
housing and quality of life in Delhi [5]. After independ-
ence, when Delhi witnessed a large influx of migrants,
within a very short time, the population of Delhi in-
creased more than two folds. To house such a large mi-
grant people city has to expand but the rate of expansion
is very fast, unplanned, uncontrolled and most of them
are illegal [6].
Each urban centre has a number of environmental
problems with varying scale and scopes which are influ-
enced by factors such as size of population and its den-
sity, climatic conditions, water resources and the flora
and fauna in and ar oun d the urb an cent re [1]. Th e state of
urban environment all over India is deteriorating so fast
that the sustainability of the cities is threatened. In metro
cities, land environment is under stress due to the pres-
sure of rapid urbanization. Population growth and
in-migration of poor people, industrial growth, ineffi-
cient and inadequate traffic corridors, poor environ-
mental infrastructure, etc. are the main factors that have
deteriorated the overall quality of the city environment.
As the cities expand and population increases, the re-
sources, which are limited, are shared. Housing, water
supply, roads, drainage, transport, education, health ser-
vices, police and fire services, etc. have not been able to
keep pace with the prevailing urban growth rate that
leads to degrading urban environmental quality.
The quality of environment of an urban area is deter-
mined by the intricate process of mankind’s making liv-
ing an enjoyable one. One of the more interesting ques-
tions with regard to urban environmental quality is how
to assess it, objectively and co mparatively, the quality of
a city’s built-up area. Is it the environmental quality of
an isolated residential building or that of a residential
complex or a neighbourhood? Some city dwellers may
instinctively define what environmental quality means
for them: they would emphasize the need for cleanliness
in the streets and arou nd the trash dumpsters, they would
mention noise problems caused by a variety of sources,
they would describe the lack of certain services, and so
on.
There are many approaches discussed and compared
for housing quality studies and environmental assess-
ment. Social and physical environment of the Durgapur
city had been assessed by observing the effect of air
quality on land use pattern and population density using
overlay method [7]. The white paper of Delhi describes
the state of urban environment of Delhi and worked out
for assessing the pollution trends and the prescribed am-
bient standards [8]. The quality of urban environment is
determined from two directional approaches one is the
‘Total City Environment’ and the other is ‘Appraisal of
Individual Buildings’ i.e., quality of life and quality of
development respectively [9]. In present study the ‘Qual-
ity of Urban Environment’ is assessed from the ‘Total
City Environment Approach’ i.e., Quality of Life.
In order to objectively evaluate the quality of a home
in a particular environment compared with a home in
another part of the city, we would need objective data
and a precise measuring tool. The application of remote
sensing data as well as its integration in GIS domain
provides planners and implementing agencies timely
information on various aspects. Information acquired
through spatial technologies not only helps in the envi-
ronmental and urban planners during policy formulation
and in implementation process, but also provides valu-
able database for monitoring and future planning pur-
poses. Indian satellite data from sensors like IRS-1D,
LISS-III MSS and PAN merged products can be very
useful in urban analysis and urban land use mapping [10].
Digital Mapping Technique has been applied for infor-
mation generation and making an up-to-date urban in-
formation [11]. The quality of urban residential envi-
ronment of Ujjain city has been assessed using aerial
remote sensing and limited field survey in reference of
physical parameters by ‘Overlay’ and ‘Assigning value
to variables’ method, i.e., ‘App raisal of individual build -
ings approach’ or Quality of Development [12]. An at-
tempt has been made to reconcile the differences be-
tween the typical approach es to Multi Criteria Evaluation
used in Vector and Raster GIS [13]. Buffer analysis of

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
64
physical parameters, which are identified and mapped
from aerial photographs and limited field checks, and
estimation of the affected population are applied to as-
sess the quality of urban environment of Dwarka in Delhi
[14]. Temperature data, derived from Landsat ETM+,
Vegetation Index (VI) derived from high resolution IK-
ONOS multi-spectral images, digitized data of the city
urban infrastructure and 3-D virtual reality models were
integrated to assess urban environment quality of Hong
Kong [9]. The change of urban environment and its im-
pact have direct repercussion on the people and their
living condition. Therefore, it was thought to assess the
quality of urban environment in one of the fastest grow-
ing district of Delhi with the help of remote sensing and
GIS technique.
2. Objectives
The main objective of the paper is assessing the envi-
ronmental quality in East district of Delhi Metropolitan
Region (DMR) using physical and other parameters,
which are derived from remote sensing satellite and sec-
ondary data. The specific research objectives of the paper
are 1) to assess the changing pattern of environmental
quality 2) to evaluate the urban environment both quali-
tatively and quantitatively by using weighted overlay
method and lastly 3) to recognize the factors leading to
such conditions and to evaluate the possibilities of im-
provement of urban environment by public participation.
3. Study Area: East Delhi-India
Delhi, the capital of India spreads over an area of 1,463
sq. km. East District of Delhi is located on the eastern
side of river Yamuna between 28° 34’ 47” to 28° 40’ 47”
N latitude and 77° 15’ 05” to 77° 20’ 37” E longitude
Figure 1, having an area of about 64 km2. It is flanked
by Gaziabad and NOIDA district of Uttar Pradesh in east
and south respectively. Among the nine Districts, East
district has three tehsil, Geeta Colony, Vivek Vihar and
Preet Vihar, 25 administrative blocks (Figure 2) and has
three villages (Vill), five Census towns (CT) apart from
Delhi Municipal Corporation’s Sahadara Zone. The East
district of Delhi was chosen for this study to asses the
quality of urban env ironment because it is the one of the
populous district and developing very fast.
East District is entirely located on the eastern side
Yamuna plain, which used to be a very fertile levelled
land but it is fast converting in to built-up areas. The
climate is semi-arid with maximum rain fall in the month
of July (296 mm), October to December are dry. While
the hottest months are May and June with mercury levels
touching 48°C whereas the lowest falls to 4°C at the end
of December and early January. The total Delhi popula-
tion was nearly 0.4 million in 1901, which kept on in-
creasing slowly and it was 1.74 million in 1951 and 9.42
million in 1991. Sharp rise in population occurred in the
last decade (1991-2001) and Delhi population reached to
13.8 million in 2001 [3] and as per Registrar General of
India (RGI) estimates Delhi’s population will be 20.78
million by 2015 [15]. East district has been experiencing
very high growth rate of urban population and it ranks 6th
among all districts with 90.19% urban population in
1991, while 98.75% urb an popu lation growth record ed in
2001, which is only after Central and New Delhi Dis-
tricts
3.1. Pattern of Urbanization in Delhi
As the national capital Delhi has drawn people from all
parts of India. Delhi is mini India with the largest num-
ber of immigrant communities who have made it their
home. Delhi has witnessed a phenomenal population
growth during past few decades. From a population of
0.46 million in 1901, its population has grown to 13.78
million in 2001 [3] (Figure 3). There was sudden in-
crease in the population in 1947, as a result of partitions
of India and Pakistan. The 1941-51 decade recorded a
growth of 90%. Since 1951, the population of Delhi has
been increasing at an average rate of about 50% every
decade (Table 1).
In the 1901 Census, more than 47.34% of Delhi’s
population lived in rural areas which showed a gradual
decline 17.60% in 1951 to 6.99% in 200 1 (Table 2). A l-
though, there has been a slight reversal of the trend, i.e.,
10.07% in 1991. Urbanisation h as increased rapidly since
1911 when the capital of India was sifted from Calcutta
(presently Kolkata) to Delhi. The pace of urbanisation
was accelerated during 1941-51 when the country was
divided into India and Pakistan and a large number of
migrant settled in Delhi. With rapid urbanisation, the
rural area is shrinking; it has reduced from 1157.52 sq
km in 1961 to 591.91 sq km in 2001. In 2001 the pop ula-
tion density was 14,387 and 1,627 persons/km2 in urban
areas and rural areas respectively. Villages of Delhi,
which have coexisted with the sprawling urban settle-
ments, still retain a great deal of rural tradition.
The rapid urbanisation has led to the development of
new settlements colonies in Delhi. These settlements are
categorised by Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in
terms of civic infrastructure, types of houses, authorised
vs. unauthorised settlement etc, Jhuggis and Jhoparis
(informal) resettlement colonies, Slum resettlement
colonies, Refugee resettlement colonies, Approved/
planned colonies, Unauthorised-regularised colonies,
Urbanised colonies, Urbanised villages, Notified slum

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
65
Figure 1. Locational aspect of study area.
Figure 2. Administrative divisions of east Delhi.

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
66
Figure 3. Population in Delhi 1901-2001.
Table 1. District-wise area and population of Delhi during 1991 to 2001.
1991 2001
District Area
(km2)
% Area to
total
area of State Population
(In lakhs)
% to Pop-
ulation
of State
Density
(pers./km2)
Population
(In lakhs)
% to Pop
ulation
of State
Density
(pers./km2)
Decadal
growth
1991-2001
North-West 440 29.7 1,778,268 18.88 18,088 2,847,395 20.66 29,395 60.12
South 250 16.9 1,502,878 15.95 26,261 2,258,367 16.38 25,760 50.27
West 129 8.7 1,434,008 15.22 15,986 2,119,641 15.38 22,637 47.81
North-East 60 4.05 1,085,250 11.52 11,116 1,763,712 12.8 16,431 62.52
South-West 420 28.3 1,084,705 11.51 11,471 1,749,492 12.69 12,996 61.29
East 64 4.31 1,023,078 10.86 6,012 1,448,770 10.51 9,033 41.61
North 60 4.05 688,252 7.31 4,042 779,788 5.66 6,471 13.30
Central 25 1.68 656,533 6.97 4,791 644,005 4.67 4,909 -1.91
New Delhi 35 2.36 167,672 1.78 2,583 171,806 1.25 4,165 2.47
Total NCT Delhi 1483 100.00 94,20,644 100.00 6352 137,82,976100.00 9,294 46.31
Source: Census of India 1991 & 2001
Table 2. Urban and rural population in Delhi 1901-2001.
Census
Years Total Population Total Urban Population % of Urban Population % of Rural Population
Annual exponen-
tial
growth rate
Decennial
growth percent
1901 4,05,819 2,14,115 52.76 47.34 -- --
1911 4,13,851 2,37,944 57.50 42.5 1.1 11.13
1921 4,88,452 3,04,420 62.32 37.68 2.5 27.94
1931 6,36,246 4,47,442 70.33 29.67 3.9 46.98
1941 9,17,939 6,95,686 75.79 24.21 4.4 55.48
1951 17,44,072 14,37,134 82.40 17.60 7.3 106.58
1961 26,58,612 23,59,408 88.75 11.25 5.0 64.17
1971 40,65,698 36,47,023 89.68 10.32 4.4 54.57
1981 62,20,406 57,68,200 92.73 7.27 4.6 58.16
1991 94,20,644 84,71,625 89.93 10.07 3.8 46.87
2001 137,82,976 12,81,9761 93.01 6.99 4.1 51.33
Census of India 1901-2001

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
67
areas/Walled City and Rural villages are the various
types of settlements which are commonly seen in Delhi.
4. Data and Methodology
District map showing the villages, Census towns, Mu-
nicipal areas and wards of Delhi has been used for
preparation of base map. Guide map and East Delhi map
was geo-referenced with the help of 1976 Survey of In-
dia (SoI) topograph ical sheet no. 53 H/6 NW and 53 H/6
SW at the scale of 1:25,000 and Guide map of Delhi
1982. The Advanced Space-born Thermal Emission Re-
flection Radiometer (ASTER) data acquired on 22nd No v.
2003 has been used in this study. The ASTER satellite
image has 15m ground resolution, which has been used
for generate land use/land cover map of 2003 and from
that map built-up area was extracted. Guide map of Delhi
1982 was digitised, cleaned, topology was built to pre-
pare land use/land cover map in Arc GIS 9.0 software
Figure 4.
The satellite data was enhanced before classification
using histogram equalization in ERDAS Imagine 8.7 for
the better quality of the image and to achiev e better clas-
sification accuracy. Further both satellite data and Guide
map which was used as base map were re-projected to a
common Universal Traverse Mercator (UTM) projec-
tion/coordinate system on 1:50,000 scale. The data were
resampled to a common spatial resolution of 15 m. Then
supervised classification was performed using maximum
likelihood algorithm for ASTER data with 4 bands in
VNIR range, i.e., band 1 (0.52-0.60 µm), band 2 (0.63-
0.69 µm), band 3 (0.76-0.86 µm), band 4 near infrared
(0.76.90 µm). Two land use land cover map was prepare
1) using Guide map of 1982 2) using ASTER satellite
data of 2003. Thereafter from these two maps built-up
area, open spaces which also includes open green spaces
were extracted for analysis. Digitized administrative
boundary was superimposed on the classified land use/
land cover map in order to get ward-wise information of
both the years 1982 and 2003.
The demographic data (household density, occupancy
ratio and population density) have been collected from
the office of Register General of India, New Delhi. The
data related to the environmental pollution has been col-
lected from the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB),
New Delhi. Integration of spatial and non-spatial (attrib-
ute data), which are collected from secondary sources i.e.
pollution, population, etc. were done in GIS environment
using Arc GIS 9.0. To asses the quality of urban envi-
ronment 8 parameters 1) % age of built-up area 2) open
spaces 3) household density 4) occupancy ratio 5) popu-
lation density 6) accessibility to roads 7) noise pollution
8) foul smell were selected, which were assigned weigh-
tages according to their relative importance Table 3. All
parameters are taken into consideration for 2003 but two
parameters housing density and occupation ratio have not
used in 1982 due to not availability of data. Weighted
Overlay Technique was applied for assessing and evalu-
ating the quality of the urban environment. Quantitative
weights were given to all parameters according to their
relative importance for the assessment of quality of ur-
ban environment.
On the basis of importance the score for the parame-
ters I, II, III, IV, and V are multiplied by 3 before adding
with the parameters VI, VII and VIII for the year 2003,
while for year 1982 the sum of selected parameter I, II
and V were multiplied by 5 instead of 3 before adding to
the VI, VII and VIII parameters. This is done for making
comparability in the two years in terms of their values
assigned, because in 1982 the parameters III & IV, i.e.,
housing density and occupancy ratio have not been used
due to non availability o f data. The weighted layers were
clubbed by using the composite score and based on it the
final layer of quality of environment map for East Delhi
was prepared. To assess the change in environment qual-
ity the composite scores of 2003 has been subtracted
from the composite scores of 1982. Finally the resulting
composite scores have been categorized into 7 different
classes.
5. Result and Discussions
5.1. Built up Area
Built up area is directly related to the housing density,
higher the housing density the lower the environmental
quality [5]. As a result of built-up densities, hazards such
as noise and air pollution are likely to increase, since
many of these problems are caused by transportation.
Higher urban densities are also liable to damage open
spaces within the cities, as well as the quality of life in
over-crowded residential neighbourhoods [16]. The East
Delhi district was sparsely built 10 years before but now
many new multi-storeyed residential colonies have come
up. In 1982, the built-up area varies from 40% to 60% in
north-eastern part and negligible in other parts. The ward
no. 78 Jagatpuri ranked first in terms of percentage of
built up area 80.16%. Lowest built up area is in Gharoli
village, which is a town in 2001 Census, with 2.8%. In
2003, the built-up areas have been increased and Jagat-
puri ranked first with 94% in 1982 it was 80.16%. The
village Chilla Saroda Khadar has least built up area of
only 8.65% which is in first category. There were 11
villages, Census towns wh ich had bu ilt-up area of < 20%
in 1982 but in 2003 only one left in < 20% category other
have gone to more built-up category. Surprisingly the

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
68
Table 3. Parameters of urban environme ntal quality.
S No. Parameters Class/Category Weightages Data source
Below 20 % 5
20% - 40% 4
40% - 60% 3
60% - 80% 2
I Built up area
Above 80% 1
Extracted from guide map, 1982 and
ASTER image, 2 003
Below 10 % 1
10% - 30% 2
30% - 50% 3
50% - 70% 4
II Open spaces
Above 70% 5
It is clipped from guide map, 1982 and
ASTER image, 2 003
Below 50 5
50 - 100 4
100 - 150 3
150 - 200 2
III Household density
Above 200 1
It is collected from Primary Census
Abstract (PCA), 2003
Below 4.5 p/h 4
4.5 - 5.0 p/h 3
5.0 - 5.5 p/h 2
IV Occupancy
ratio
Above 5.5 p/h 1
It is collected from PCA, 2003
Below 300 p/km2 5
300 - 500 p/km 2 4
500 - 700 p/km 2 3
700 - 1000 p/km2 2
Population density
Above 1000 1
It is assessed by projected population for
1982 & 2003 and the built-up area.
V
Buffer zones Zone I(A) Zone II(B)
250 m 500 m
No accessibility 4 1
1% - 25% 8 2
25% - 50% 12 3
50% - 75% 16 4
75% - 99% 20 5
VI % age of
population accessible
to roads
100% 24 6
The major roads are mapped and their
buffer has been created at the distance of
250 m and 500 m in Arc GIS, which was
overlaid on the built-up layer to get ace-
ssible areas.
40 m 180 m
Not affected 10 5
1% - 5% 8 4
5% - 15% 6 3
15% - 30% 4 2
VII % age of population affected
from noise
Above 30% 2 1
The buffer of 40 m and 180 m (noise
exposure zone) has been created for the
two tracks of Eastern Railway and over-
laid on built-up layer.
250 m 500 m
Not affected 10 5
1% - 15% 8 4
15% - 30% 6 3
30% - 45% 4 2
VIII % age of population affected
from foul smell
Above 45% 2 1
The open chocked drains have been
digitised in GIS and the smell affected
areas has been determined by making
buffer zone of 250 m and 500 m.

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
69
Figure 4. Flow chart of methodology for land use/land cover classification.
Patparganj, a higher-medium income colony, which also
had built-up area of < 20% have moved to 60-80% cate-
gory in 2003 (Table 4 & Figure 5). This shows that in
most of the wards and villages land use have been
changed by man. That is why the built up areas have
increased in most of the areas.
5.2. Open Spaces
The open space is another important aspect for the as-
sessment of environmental quality which pro vides pollu-
tion free environment for the people living nearby.
Vegetated and open green spaces (parks) have been
taken as one of the most important parameter of quality
of urban environment assessment. More open and green
spaces in the city better is the quality of environment. It
is very essential to have open green in the surro unding of
living area for healthy life. It is commonly seen that in
recent years apart from few planned residential colonies
other building are coming up at a very fast rate without
leaving any open space or parks. In 1982 almost 2/3rd of
the total study area had > 70% open spaces but situation
has change the other way round and after 20 years in
2003 about 90% of the area was in the 10-50% open
spaces (Table 5 & Figure 6). The ward Jagatpuri r anked
last in terms of percentage of open spaces to the total
area, with 17.64%. The village Gharoli, which becomes
as Census town in 2001 has highest 95.23% open spaces,
followed by Dallopura and Chilla Saroda Khadar. In
2003, village Chilla Saroda Khadar ranked first in terms
of largest area under open spaces with 81.42% and the
second is Shamas Pur, which has 72.19% open spaces.
The DMC wards have less open spaces, i.e., Shaikarpur,
and Jagatpuri have 2.66% and 3.7% open spaces respec-
tively. The major changes have been observed in the all
Census towns that the open spaces decreased rapidly in
the past years due to expansion of residential areas. The
Census town Gharoli, situated at the south-eastern boun-
dary of East Delhi has largest area under open spaces
with 58% among all Census towns, wh ile Patparganj has
least open spaces with 28%. So the DMC wards are
most ly v er y mu ch co ng est ed, especially the northern part
of the study area.
5.3. Housing Density
Housing density (number of houses/Km²) shows the
pressure of households on existing utilities and services

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
70
Figure 5. Change in built up area in east Delhi, 1982–2003.
Table 4. Built up areas in different wards, CTs & villages in 1982 & 2003.
Wards, Census Towns and Villages
1982 2003
Built up (%) weights
Chilla S. Khadar(Vill), Gharoli(Vill), Dallo Pura(Vill),
Kondli(Vill), Chilla S Bangar(Vill), Patparganj(Vill),
Shamas Pur(Vill), 69-Mayur Vihar, 68-Dallopura,
79-Preet Vihar, 74-Laxmi Nagar, Shakar Pur(Vill)
Chilla S. Khadar(Vill) < 20 % 5
72-Mandawl, 80-Vishwas Nagar, 82-Vivek Vihar,
73-Geeta Colony, 70-Kondali Shamas Pur(Vill), Shakar Pur(Vill), 74-Laxmi Nagar, Gharoli(CT) 20% - 40% 4
87-Rohtas Nagar, 75-Gandhi Nagar, 71-Shaikarpur, 76
-Raghubarpura, 77-Krishna Na gar, 81-Shahdara
73-Geeta Colony, Kondli(CT), Chilla S Ban-
gar(CT), 75-Gandhi Nagar, 87-Rohtas Nagar,
79-Preet Vihar, Dallo Pura(CT), 69-Mayur Vihar,
72-Mandawli, 80-Vishwas Nagar
40% - 60% 3
None 82-Vivek Vihar, Patparganj(CT), 68-Dallopura, 81-Shahdara, 77-Krishna Nagar, 70-Kondali,
76-Raghubarpura 60% - 80% 2
78-Jagatpuri 71-Shaikarpur, 78-Jagatpuri > 80% 1
Note: Vill - Villages, CT - Census towns
i.e., drinking water and sanitation etc. which is needed by
the people. Higher the housing density, poorer the qual-
ity of urban environment [5]. In 2003, the Delhi Munici-
pal Corporation (DMC) Raghubarpura ward had highest
housing density with 32,700 houses/km². The highest
housing density among Census towns is in Gharoli with
20,000 houses/km2. The lowest housing density is in
Samaspur village. The village Chilla Saroda Khadar has
high housing density among all villages with 108 houses/
km2. It can be easily observed that a large area in the
middle of the district, i.e., Mandawli, Preet Vihar, Shai-
karpur and villages Shakar Pur Barmad and Shamaspur
has less than 5,000 houses/km2 housing density (Table 6
& Figure 7). While in northward and southward

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
71
Figure 6. Percentage open spaces in east delhi, 1982 & 2003.
Table 5. Open spaces in different wards, CTs and villages in 1982 & 2003.
Wards, Census Towns and Villages
1982 2003
Open Spaces weight
None 71-Shaikarpur, 78-Jagatpuri Below 10% 1
78-Jagatpuri, 81-Shahdara
76-Raghubarpura, 70-Kondali, 77-Krishna Nagar,
81-Shahdara, 68-Dallopura, 82-Vivek Vihar, Pat-
parganj(CT), 69-Mayur Vihar
10% - 30% 2
76-Raghubarpura, 77-Krishna N agar, 75-Gandhi
Nagar, 87-Rohtas Nagar, 71-Shaikarpur
72-Mandawli, 75-Gandhi Nagar, 87-Rohtas Nagar,
Dallo Pura(CT), 80-Vishwas Nagar, 79-Preet Vi-
har, Chilla S. Bangar(CT), 73-Geeta Colony
(42.76), Ko n dli(CT)
30% - 50% 3
73-Geeta Colony, 74-Laxmi Nagar, 70-Kondali,
82-Vivek Vihar, Shakar Pur Baramad(Vill)
74-Laxmi N agar, Gharoli(CT), Shakar Pur
Baramad(Vill) 50% - 70% 4
80-Vishwas Nagar, 72-Mandawli, 79-Preet Vihar,
69-Mayur Vihar, Shamas Pur(Vill),
68-Dallopura,Patparganj(Vill), Chilla S. Ban-
gar(Vill), Kondli(Vill), Chilla S. Khadar(Vill),
Dallo Pura(Vill), Gharoli(Vill)
Shamas Pur(Vill), Chilla S. Khadar(Vill) Above 70% 5
direction the housing density is very high, especially in
the north eastern part is the old part of the East of Delhi.
The southern areas are recently developed, but due to
easily availability of land at ch eap rates in NOIDA.
5.4. Occupancy Ratio
Number of persons/household which is also referred as
occupancy ratio gives the picture of pressure of popula-

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
72
Figure 7. Household density of east delhi, 2003.
Table 6. Housing density in different wards, census towns & villages.
Wards, Census Towns and Villages Housing Density
(Household/km2)weights
Shamas Pur(Vill), Shakar Pur Baramad(Vill), 71-Shaikarpur, 72-Mandawli, 79-Preet Vihar, 68-Dallopura Below 5,000 5
Patparganj(CT), 69-Mayur Vihar, 80-Vishwas Nagar, Kondli(CT), 82-Vivek Vi har, 70-Kondali, 73-Geeta Colony 5,000 - 1,0000 4
Chilla Saroda Khadar(Vill), 87-Rohtas Nagar, 74-Laxmi Nagar 10,000 - 15,000 3
77-Krishna Nagar, Chilla Saroda Bangar(CT), 81-Shahdara, Dallo Pura(CT), Gharoli(CT) 15,000 - 20,000 2
78-Jagatpuri, 75-Gandhi Nagar, 76-Raghubarpura Above 20,000 1
tion on individual house. Lesser the occupancy ratio bet-
ter will be the quality of environment. The data for 1982
was not available in the Government office so occupancy
ration was analysed for 2003 only. In 2003 the all vil-
lages of the study area has low occupancy rate, while the
DMC wards in the northern part has highest occupancy
ratio, among them Raghubarpura, Gandhi Nagar, Rohtas
Nagar and Shahdara has above 5 persons/household.
Among Census towns Kondali has lowest and Dallupura
has highest occupancy ratio (Table 7 & Figure 8). This
is because these areas are mainly inhabited by lower-
medium income people who have large family size.
5.5. Population Density
The population grows very fast in urban areas due to
migration of people mainly from rural areas and also
from nearby smaller cities and towns, which in turn leads
to pressure on all existing resources of bigger and metro
cities like Delhi. So the population dens ity has been con-
sidered inversely related parameters to the quality of
urban environmen t. In 1982, entire north- eastern p art had
low population den sity and out of 25 villages 20 villages
had population density of 1000 person/km² or even less
Table 8. The Raghubarpura ward ranked first in terms of
high popul at i on density wit h 1,524 person/ k m².
In 2003, the analysis of population density indicates
that the DMC wards, which are situated along the Grand
Trunk road, have very high population density except
some areas. The northern and southern part of the study
area is more populated than the middle part. DMC wards,
Raghubarpura, Gandhi Nagar, Jagatpuri, Sahadara in

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
73
Figure 8. Occupancy ratio of east delhi, 2003.
Table 7. Occupancy ration in different war ds census towns 7 villages.
Wards, Census Towns and Villages Occupancy Ratio (persons/household) Weight
Chilla S. Khadar(Vill), Shakar Pur Baramad(Vill), Shamas Pur(Vill) Below 4 4
Kondli(CT), Chilla S. Bangar(CT), Patparganj(CT), Gharoli(CT), 69-Mayur Vihar,
72-Mandawli, 79-Preet Vihar 4 - 5 3
82-Vivek Vihar, 74-Laxmi Nagar, 68-Dallopura, 71-Shaikarpur, Dallo Pura(CT),
78-Jagatpuri, 73-Geeta Colony, 80-Vishwas Nagar, 77-Krishna Nagar, 70-Kondali 5 - 5 2
81-Shahdara, 87 -Rohtas Nagar, 75- G andhi Nagar, 7 6-Raghubarpura Above 5 1
North and a Census town Dallopura have population
density > 1,000 person/km² (Table 8 & Figure 9). The
northern part which was developed earlier is experienc-
ing very high population pressure due to heavy influx of
migrants from Bihar and Bengal, while the southern part
which is recently developed due to migration from ad-
joining state, like Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Rajasthan.
5.6. Accessibility to Roads
Transportation affects urban quality of life because of the
type of accessibility it allows. Therefore, distance of
residential colonies from major roads is an important
aspect with respect to availing the utility and service fa-
cilities. In this regard two buffer zones at the distance of
250 m and 500 m were created along the major roads
Figure 10. The total road length available in Delhi is just
0.28 km/000 populations. The number of vehicles in
Delhi is rapidly increasing and is expected to reach 3.87
million by the year 2015 [17]. This leads to traffic conges-
tion and reduced traffic speeds, often as l ow as 10 km/ hrs.
In 1982, the entire north-eastern part has very good
road network and almost 75% area were having major
roads at a distance of less than 250 m and rest area are
served by major road at the distance of 250 m to 500 m.
Excluding the north-eastern part of the East district all
area have poor road network. The southern most part
does not have any major roads at the distance of 500 m
but it is served by the other minor roads. About 98%
population of Gharoli Census town in the south eastern
part does not have access to any major roads at a distance
of 500 m.
5.7. Noise Affected Area
Noise pollution is one of the most prominent and influ-

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
74
77°16'
77°16'
77°18' 77°20'
77°20'77°18'
77°16'
77°16'
77°18' 77°20'
77°20'77°18'
28°36'28°38 '28°40'
28°36'28°38'28°40'
N
1012Kilometers
EAST DELHI
19822003
Y
A
M
U
N
A
R
I
V
E
R
Y
A
M
U
N
A
R
I
V
E
R
PO PU LAT ION D E NSIT Y
Railway track
River
State Boundary
Dis tri ct Boun dary
Village, CT & War ds
Boundary
300 - 500
500 - 700
700 - 1000
Above 1000
Below 300
Population density
(in person/hectare)
Figure 9. Population density in east delhi, 1982 & 2003.
Table 8. Population density in different wards, CTs & villages in 1982 & 2003.
Wards, Census Towns and Villages
1982 2003
Pop. Density
(person/km²) weights
Chilla S. Khadar (Vill), Shakar Pur(Vill ), Shamas Pur(Vill),
Patparganj(Vill), Ch illa S. Bangar(Vill), 71-Shaikarp ur,
Dallo Pura(Vill), 72-Mandawli, Kondli(Vill)
Shamas Pur(Vill), Shakar Pur(Vill), 71-Shaikarpur,
72-Mandawli, 79-Preet Vihar, 68-Dallopura, Patpar-
ganj(CT), 6 9-Mayur Vihar Below 300 5
Gharoli(Vill), 73-Geeta Colony, 79-Preet Vihar, 87-R ohtas
Nagar Kondli(CT), 80-Vishwas Nagar, 82-Vivek Vihar, Chilla S. Khadar(Vill), 70-Kondali, 73-Geeta Colony 300 - 500 4
82-Vivek Vi har, 7 0-Kondali , 74-La xmi Nagar, 80-Vi shwas
Nagar, 68-Dall opura, 77-Krishn a Nagar 87-Rohtas Nagar, 74- Laxmi Nagar 500 - 700 3
78-Jagatpuri, 81-Shahdara, 75-Gandhi Nagar, 69-Mayur
Vihar Chilla S. Bangar(CT), 77-Krishna Nagar, Gharoli(CT) 700 - 1000 2
76-Raghubarpura Dallo Pura(CT), 81-Shahdara, 78-Jagatpuri, 75-Gandhi
Nagar, 76-Ra ghubarpura Above 1000 1
ential factors affecting the quality of life of city residents
and urban environmental quality [18]. Unwanted sound
or noise damages human hearing and creates other re-
lated problems. Railway is considered to be one of the
chief noise polluting agents. Two buffer zones at the
distance of 40 m and 180 m has been created and coded
with VII A and VII B respectively based on US System
of Noise Exposure Forecast. Two railway tracks crosses
the study area from east to west direction, one at the
north while other in middle part. The first railway track
affects more people while second one affects fewer, be-
cause northern part is more populated then central area
Figure 11.
5.8. Smell Affected Area
Urban areas, especially in developing countries like India
waste water is drained out from various sources like

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
75
Figure 10. Major roads and accessible areas, 1982 & 2003.
77°16'
77°16'
77°18'77°20'
77°20'77°18'
77°16'
77°16'
77°18' 77°20'
77°20'77°18'
28°36'28°38 '28°40'
28°36'28°38'28°40'
N
1012Kilometers
Railway track
River
State Boundary
D is tri ct Boun dary
Village, CT & War ds
Boundary
Not affected
Noise affected areas
40 m Buffer
180 m Buffer
EA ST DELHI
NOISE AFFECTED
AREAS
19822003
Y
A
M
U
N
A
R
I
V
E
R
Y
A
M
U
N
A
R
I
V
E
R
Figure 11. Noise affected areas, 1982 & 2003.
houses, commercial places and industrial areas etc. by
narrow open drains to main drainage system which is
also open. Garbage is normally dumped in residential
colonies wherever open space is available in the absence
of garbage bins. To assess the population affected by
foul smell from open drains and waste disposal sites
again two buffer zones at the distance of 250 m and 500
m has been created and has been coded as VIII A and
VIII B respectively.
Gahzipur drain and Shahdara drain are the two main
drains in the study area both are open, while Hindon cut
is the third which is very much polluted. Hindon cut

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
76
flows from east to west direction and meet the river Ya-
muna, the two small drains flows from north to south
meets Gahzipur drain, which flows along the H indon cut.
Shahdara drain start from middle of the study area and
flows in south direction and meet at Gahzipur drain. In
order to assess the population affected by foul smell due
to open drainage and garbage buffer maps along drains
and around garbage collection points was created to
know the extent of smell. These two maps were then
overlaid on the population density maps to get the idea
that how many people are being affected with the foul
smell due to open drainage.
The study shows that in 1982 about 86,718 persons
were affected by foul smell who were living in 250 m
buffer distance to the drain, while 1, 14,543 people are
under 500 m foul smell buffer zone. Village Kondali is
highly affected by smell i.e. 62.5% population affected
by the smell in 250 m buffer while rest population af-
fected by 500 m smell zone. In 2003 a garbage dumping
site comes up at Gajipur in the south eastern part. And
about 15, 00,798 persons are affected by the foul smell
and out of that 5, 15,860 persons were affected by severe
foul smell who lived in 250 m buffer distance from the
drain (Figure 12). While 9, 84,938 persons comes under
500 m smell zone. DMC ward Krishna Nagar is highly
affected by foul smell, about 52% population are affected
by the smell in 250 m buffer while 25% population are
affected by 500 m smell zone.
6. Comparative Analysis of Quality of Urban
Environment (1982-2003)
Human beings impose changes on natural ecosystems
and increasing control of environment often creates con-
flicts between his goals and natural process. Urban con-
centrations intensity, the shortage of housing, transport
capacity and other urban amenities affects in day-to-day
life of common people. The deficiencies magnify crowd-
ing, noise, air pollutants and street filth. These factors are
detrimental to health and well being of the people.
Qualitative weights were assigned to 8 selected envi-
ronment parameters and then composite weights were
calculated for both 1982 and 2003 that shows the quality
of urban environment (Tables 9 and 10). These values
are classified in seven different classes of urban envi-
ronment condition, i.e., excellent, very good, fair, desir-
able, acceptable minimum, poor, bad alarming and then
maps were prepared for both the years 1982 & 2003
(Figure 13). Higher the weights better the urban envi-
ronmental quality and vice-versa.
Most of the area (89%) were having good environment
conditions in 19 82 only ward no. 78 Jagatpuri was under
bad alarming cond ition because it h ad high built up land s
with least open spaces. The northern areas are served by
National Highway (NH-2) so, along this highway linear
urban sprawl has been observed at a fast rate. The north-
astern area is near to the city centre so the unauthorized
colonies have come up which degrade the urban envi-
ronment. About 89% area has good environmental con-
dition, which are mainly urban villages, amo ng some are
uninhabited and having most of the area open or covered
with food crops. DMC wards namely 72-Mandawali, 73-
Geeta Colony, 74-Laxmi Nagar, 79-Preet Vihar have fair
environment condition. Geeta colony and Laxmi Nagar
have high densely built up area but served by the major
roads and are not affected by noise or foul smell, that’s a
fair environmental condition, is seen.
In 2003, little over two decades, the result of urban
environment conditions indicate th at comparatively most
area 75% have good environment conditions while 22%
is in poor condition and rest 3.5% is in bad alarming
condition in East Delhi. Th is is mainly due to unplann ed
expansion on open vacant green areas excellent envi-
ronment condition has been replaced by the poorer envi-
ronmental conditions. In 1982 two villages are in excel-
lent condition (Table 11). Out of eight village in 1981
five are becomes as Census town of Preet Vihar tehsil.
The three villages situated along the river Yamuna has
not been sprawled so the two villages Shakar Pur Bar-
mad and Samas Pur are in very good condition and rest
(Chilla saroda Khadar) is in fair condition. Among five
Census towns Dallopura is in poor condition, while oth-
ers are in desirable environment cond ition. These Census
towns were in very good condition in 1982 thus the en-
vironment condition has been degraded in these areas
very much due to outward expansion of Delhi When we
talk about the environment condition in DMC wards,
ward no 78 Jagatpuri which was in bad alarming condi-
tion in 1982 is same in 2003 followed by 76 Raghubar-
pura. Ward no 68 Dallo Pura ranked first in terms of
good environmental condition followed by 69 Mayur
Vihar, 74 Laxmi Nagar, 73 Geeta Colony, Shaikarpur, 79
Preet Vihar have fair environmental condition.
7. Change in Quality of Urban Environment
(1982-2003)
Change is the Law of Nature but an urban environment
condition is being chang ed rapidly due to interference of
Man. The entire East Delhi has been changed signifi-
cantly, mostly in negative direction (Table 12). The
analysis shows that the area under poor environment
condition has been increased, while bad alarming condi-
tions have slightly increased in 2003 from 1982 (Figure
14). Most of the East district was in a better state of en-
vironment in 1982 , but in 2003 thing s hav e been ch ang ed

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
77
Figure 12. Foul smell affected areas, 1982 & 2003.
Figure 13. Quality of urban environment in east Delhi in 1982 & 2003.
and now 50% area is in very good, fair and desirable
condition.
The study clearly shows that comparatively many ar-
eas in the East District of Delhi Metropolitan Region
(DMR) have good environment condition. But in com-
parison to the year 1982, the quality of environment has
been degraded in many areas in 2003. Major chan ges are
observed in the southern part especially in all Census
towns. The Census towns namely Dallupura and Patpar-
ganj are in very poor condition in the term environment
degradation, while Kondali has minimum acceptable
degradation in and rest areas show poor condition. The
village Shakar Pur Barmad ranked first in terms of im-
provement in environment condition, which was ranked

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
78
Figure 14. Area under different environment conditions, 1982 & 2003.
N
Imp roved
Not Changed
Acceptable
degradation
Poor Degradation
Severe Degradation
Environmental change
28°36'
28°36'
28°38'
28°38'
28°40'
28°40'
77°16'
77°16'
77°18'
77°18'
77°20'
77°20'
CHANGE IN
ENVIRONMENT QUALITY
EAST DELHI
1982 - 2003
Riv er
Road
State Boundary
District Boundary
Vill, CT & Ward
Boundary
101234Kilometers
Figure 15. Change in environment quality, 1982-2003.

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
79
Table 9. Environment quality parameters weights 1982.
% Pop.
accessible to
roads
%Pop affected
from noise %Pop affected from foul smell
S. No. Village/
CT/Ward no. Area name Built up (I) Open spaces(II) Pop. Density(V) 5×(I+II+V)
250 m500 m40 m180 m 250 m 500 m
Composite
score
1 Vill Shakar Pur 5 4 5 70 4 1 10 5 10 5 105
2 Vill Shamas Pur 5 5 5 75 12 2 10 3 4 5 111
3 Vill
Chilla S.
Khadar 5 5 5 75 4 1 10 5 10 5 110
4 CT
Chilla S.
Bangar 5 5 5 75 12 2 10 3 10 5 117
5 CT Patparganj 5 5 5 75 4 1 10 5 10 5 110
6 CT Dallopura 5 5 5 75 4 1 8 5 10 5 108
7 CT Kondli 5 5 5 75 4 1 10 5 2 5 102
8 CT Gharoli 5 5 4 70 4 1 8 5 4 5 97
9 68 Dallopura 5 5 3 65 4 1 8 5 10 4 97
10 69 Mayur Vihar 5 5 2 60 4 1 10 5 10 3 93
11 70 Kondali 4 4 3 55 4 1 10 5 6 3 84
12 71 Shaikarpur 3 3 5 55 20 2 10 5 2 3 97
13 72 Mandawli 4 5 5 70 8 2 10 2 10 3 105
14 73 Geeta Colony 4 4 4 60 16 3 10 5 8 3 105
15 74 Laxmi Nagar 5 4 3 60 16 3 10 5 10 3 107
16 75 Gandhi Nagar 3 3 2 40 20 2 10 3 10 3 88
17 76
Raghubar-
pura 3 3 1 35 12 2 10 3 10 3 75
18 77
Krishna Na-
gar 3 3 3 45 20 4 10 4 8 2 93
19 78 Jagatpuri 1 2 2 25 12 3 10 5 2 2 59
20 79 Preet Vihar 5 5 4 70 12 3 10 4 8 2 109
21 80 Vishwas
Nagar 4 5 3 60 12 3 10 4 8 2 99
22 81 Shahdara 3 2 2 35 16 3 10 1 6 1 72
23 82 Vivek Vihar 4 4 3 55 12 2 10 1 8 1 89
24 87 Rohtas Nagar 3 3 4 50 24 1 10 1 8 1 95

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
80
Table 10. Environment quality parameters weights, 2003.
% Pop. accessible to roads
%Pop affected from noise
%Pop affected from foul smell
Sl. No.
Village/CT/Ward no.
Area name Built up (I)
Open spaces(II)
Household density(III) Occupational ratio(IV)
Pop. Density(V)
5×(I+II+V)
250 m 500 m40 m 180 m 250 m 500 m
Composite score
1 Vill Shakar Pur 4 4 5 4 5 65 12 3 10 5 5 4 110
2 Vill Shamas Pur 4 5 5 4 5 70 16 3 8 3 2 1 104
3 Vill Chilla S. Khadar5 5 3 4 4 70 8
3 10 5 1 1 92
4 CT Chilla S Bangar3 3 2 3 2 40 16
3 10 4 5 5 87
5 CT Patparganj 2 2 4 3 5 45 4 2 10 5 2 2 75
6 CT Dallo Pura 3 3 2 2 1 35 8 3 10 5 3 2 67
7 CT Kondli 3 3 4 4 4 50 8 3 10 5 3 3 89
8 CT Gharoli 4 4 1 3 2 50 4 2 10 5 4 4 75
9 68 Dallopura 2 2 5 2 5 45 24 1 10 5 5 1 99
10 69 Mayur Vihar 3 2 4 3 5 50 16 3 10 5 4 4 97
11 70 Kondali 2 2 4 2 4 40 16 3 10 5 3 3 85
12 71 Shaikarpur 1 1 5 2 5 35 20 2 10 5 5 5 94
13 72 Mandawli 3 3 5 3 5 55 8 3 8 3 3 4 89
14 73 Geeta Colony3 3 4 2 4 50 16 3 10 5 5 5 97
15 74 Laxmi Nagar 4 4 3 2 3 55 16 3 10 5 5 5 97
16 75 Gandhi Nagar3 3 1 1 1 35 20 2 8 2 5 5 74
17 76 Raghubarpura2 2 1 1 1 25 12 4 6 2 3 3 54
18 77 Krishna Nagar2 2 2 2 2 30 20 2 8 3 1 3 68
19 78 Jagatpuri 1 1 1 2 1 15 12 3 10 5 4 3 59
20 79 Preet Vihar 3 3 5 3 5 55 12 3 10 3 3 3 94
21 80 Vishwas Nagar3 3 4 2 4 50 12 3 10 4 3 3 86
22 81 Shahdara 2 2 2 1 1 25 16 3 6 1 4 3 61
23 82 Vivek Vihar 2 2 4 2 4 40 16 2 6 1 4 4 79
24 87 Rohtas Nagar3 3 3 1 3 45 24 1 10 1 4 4 87

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
81
Table 11. Environment quality in 1982 and 2003.
1982 2003
Wards, CT,Villages %Area Wards, CT, Villages %Area Environment quality Composite score
Chilla S. Bangar(Vill), Shamas Pur(Vill) 12.21 Excellent Above 110
Chilla S. Khadar(Vill), Patparganj(Vill),
79-Preet Vihar, Dallo Pura(Vill),
74-Laxmi Nag ar,
72-Mandawli,
73-Geeta Colony, Shakar Pur(Vill),
Kondli(Vill)
57.08 Shaka r Pur(Vill), Shamas
Pur(Vill) 18.83 Very Good 100 - 110
80-Vishwas Nagar, Gharoli(Vill),
68-Dallopura,
71-Shaikarpur,
87-Rohtas Nagar, 69-Mayur Vihar,
77-Krishna Nagar
19.44
68-Dallopura,
69-Mayur Vihar,
74-Laxmi Nag ar,
73-Geeta Colony,
71-Shaikarpur,
79-Preet Vihar,
Chilla S Khadar(Vill)
32.14 Fair 90 - 100
82-Vivek Vihar,
75-Gandhi Nagar,
70-Kondali 5.78
Kondli(CT),
72-Mandawli,
87-Rohtas Nagar,
Chilla S Bangar(CT),
80-Vishwas Nagar,
70-Kondali
24.06 Desirable 80 - 90
76-Raghubarpura,
81-Shahdara 2.91 82-Vivek Vihar,
Gharoli(CT), Patparganj,
75-Gandhi Nagar 12.59 Acceptable Minimum 70 - 80
77-Krishna Nagar,
Dallo Pura(CT),
81-Shahdara 8.33 Poor 6 0 - 70
78-Jagatpuri 1.97
78-Jagatpuri,
76-Raghubarpura 3.44 Bad Alarming Below 60
as very good in 1982, changed to excellent condition in
2003. All DMC wards are slightly degraded except
Krishna Nagar and Raghubarpura in North and Man-
dawli in South. The DMC ward Jagatpuri has not shown
any change in the two decades from 1982 to 2003 (Fig-
ure 15).
8. Public Participation Approach and the
Urban Environmental Quality
It is seen that better urban environmental quality in some
districts of Delhi is achieved after public battles, between
municipal authorities like New Delhi Municipal Corpo-
ration (NDMC), Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD)
and planning authority like Delhi Development Author-
ity (DDA) and between various groups of Resident’s
Welfare Associations (RWA). Arguments that stem from
conflicts of interest create different types of mechanisms
for dialogue, which are generally referred to as “public
participation” or “public involvement.” In recent years
there has been a growing public awareness of the need to
play a more active role in designing the urban environ-
ment in which we all live and breathes.
As it is said earlier that most of the world’s population
chooses to live in cities. Environmental quality, in the
broadest sense of the term, is closely related to the qual-
ity of life of the urban resident. The two actors that have
the strongest influence on the quality of life in the urban
environment are 1) the residents in the way they relate to
environmental issues and 2) policy-makers and deci-
sion-makers-in the way they plan and implement a se-
ries of policy measures that could potentially improve, or
destroy, the urban quality of life.
Planning decisions that influence the urban environ-
ment are usually characterized by the fact that they are
made by the administration, with the help of some ex-
perts and urban planners. Residents play a minor role and
their ability to influence and change decisions that dic-
tate the quality of th eir lives is limited. Decision-makers,
or planners, tend to weigh various alternatives and

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
82
Table 12. Change in urban environment (1982–2003).
Villages, CTs &
DMC wards
Environment Quality
In 1982
Environment Quality
In 2003 Change in 1982–2003
Shakar Pur Bar amad Very Good Excellent Improved
Shamas Pur Excellent Very Good Acceptable degradation
Chilla Saroda Khadar Excellent Fair Poor Degradation
Chilla Saroda Bangar Excellent Desirable Poor Degradation
Patparganj Excellent Acceptable Minimum Severe Degradation
Dallopura Very Good Poor Severe Degradation
Kondli Very Good Desirable Acceptable degradation
Gharoli Fair Acceptable Minimum Poor Degradation
68-Dallopura Fair Fair Improved
69-Mayur Vihar Fair Fair Improved
70-Kondali Desirable Desirable Improved
71-Shaikarpur Fair Fair Acceptable degradation
72-Mandawli Very Good Desirable Poor Degradation
73-Geeta Colony Very Good Fair Acceptable degradation
74-Laxmi Nagar Very Good Fair Acceptable degradation
75-Gandhi Nagar Desirable Acceptable Minimum Acceptable degradation
76-Raghubarpura Acceptable Minimum Bad Alarming Poor Degradation
77-Krishna Nagar Fair Poor Poor Degradation
78-Jagatpuri Bad Alarming Bad Alarming Not Changed
79-Preet Vihar Very Good Fair Acceptable degradation
80-Vishwas Nagar Fair Desirable Acceptable degradation
81-Shahdara Acceptable Minimum Poor Acceptable degradation
82-Vivek Vihar Desirable Acceptable Minimum Acceptable degradation
87-Rohtas Nagar Fair De si ra b le Acceptable degradation
choose the one they prefer in terms of “the public inter-
est,” as they perceive it. This concept would seem to
reflect a balance between the needs of people and groups
of citizens often defined as “narrow interests” and be-
tween “the greater good,” as perceived by policymakers.
Realization of that interest is the rational basis underly-
ing urban planning and development. But environmental
quality is often trampled in the name of “the public in-
terest” and various populations in the city are getting
affected in its wake.
Over the last few decade city like Delh i has undergone
impressive development in the public’s awareness of
environmental issues and planning, and the ability of
individuals, groups and communities to influence urban
environmental quality through planning and the use of
policy tools. This is seen mainly with the increase in lit-
eracy and coming up of various NGOs. On the other
hand, there are still many people who are not cognizant
of the importance of planning and its impact on the urban
environment [19]. Everyone wants to have a spacious
apartment, and clean air. The question is, what is “clean”
and who gets to define it; and what is the price we are
willing to pay in order to reduce open spaces in the city
for the sake of constantly increasing the size of the aver-
age housing unit? These are clearly questions of values,
and therefore the answers cannot be based solely on the
opinions of environmental experts, no matter how pro-
fessional and well trained they may be. Issues pertaining

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
83
to public participation are also a matter of great concern.
They are based on an acceptance of democratic and plu-
ralistic values, without which there is no conceptual basis
for public participation. The idea that the public has a
fundamental right to be involved in the decisions that
affect their lives is a values statement, by definition.
Since urban environmental quality is determined, to a
large extent, by planners, decision-makers and policy-
makers who influence the quality of life of each individ-
ual, the public has th e right to have a say in these matters.
Through involvement and participation, the public
should have an influence on planning, the decisions that
are made and policies that are formulated for the better
urban environmen tal quality.
9. Conclusions
As the urban areas are growing at a fast rate, especially
in metropolitan cities like Delhi and Mumbai etc. so
up-to-date information on land and people is needed to
monitor and manage the quality of urban environmental.
The paper shows that the East Delhi has experienced
environmental deterioration in two decades especially in
southern periphery due to unplanned urban expansion
adjoining to the state of Uttar Pradesh. Physical envi-
ronment is to be improved in north-western part, by ur-
ban renewal scheme by providing greenery and im-
provement of traffic movement. The physical environ-
ment in many slums areas is poor and they should be
provided with necessary services lik e water supply, sani-
tation, sewerage and accessibility to roads. Remote
sensing data and GIS technique is very useful for extrac-
tion of information like built-u p areas, open green space,
urban land use mapping that are important attribute for
assessing the urban environmental qu ality for a big urban
agglomeration. The fast growing areas in Census towns
located in southern part should be properly planned and
the infrastructure and other recreational facilities should
be improved in these areas so as to improve the envi-
ronmental quality of these urban settings. There should
be a larger role of public for planning and designing the
urban land use pattern and other associated activities in
order to have a healthy urban environment for the good
quality of life.
10. References
[1] A. Rahman, M. Netzband, S. Alka and M. Javed, “An
assessment of Urban Environmental Issues Using Remote
Sensing and GIS Techniques an Integrated Approach: A
Case Study: Delhi, India,” In: A. de Sherbinin, A. Rah-
man, A. Barbieri, J. C. Fosto and Y. Zhu, Eds., Urban
Population-Environment Dynamics in the Developing
World: Case Studies an Lessons Learned, International
Cooperation in National Research in Demography
(CICRED), Paris, 2009, pp. 181-211.
[2] “Census of India,” New Delhi, 1991. www.censusindia.
net
[3] “Census of India,” New Delhi, 2001, www.censusindia.
net
[4] S. Fazal, “Land Reorganization Study along Major
Roads,” Land Use Policy, Vol. 18, No. 2, 2001, pp.
191-199. doi:10.1016/S0264-8377(01)00007-2
[5] B. Mishra, R. B. Singh and M. Anupama, “Delhi Me-
tropolis: Housing and Quality of Life,” In: R. P. Mishra,
Million Cities of India, Vol. 1, 2001, pp. 196-228.
[6] A. Rahman, “Application of Remote Sensing and GIS
Technique for Urban Environmental Management and
Sustainable Development of Delhi, India,” In: M. Netz-
band, W. L. Stefnow and C L. Reman, Eds., Applied Re-
mote Sensing for Urban Planning, Governance and Sus-
tainability, Springer-Verlag Publishes, Berlin, 2007, pp.
165- 197. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-68009-3_8
[7] S. Sengupta and P. Venkatachalam, “Assessment of So-
cial and Physical Environment of a Planned Town with
Geographical Information System: A Case of Durgapur,
West Bengal, India,” In: B. S. Sokhi and S. M. Rashid,
Eds., Remote Sensing of Urban Environment, 1999, pp.
196-203.
[8] MoEF (Ministry of Environment and Forest), “White
Paper on Pollution in Delhi with Action Plan,” Govern-
ment of India, 1997.
[9] J. Nichol and M. S. Wong, “Mapping and Modelling of
Urban Environment Quality in Hongkong,” 2004.
[10] ISRO, “Urban Planning Using IRS-1C Data,” Banglore,
2005.
[11] R. S. Rathi and R. R. Vatsvani, “Digital Mapping of Ur-
ban/Sub-Urban Environment of Dehradun Using SPOT
Data,” In: B. S. Sokhi and S. M. Rashid, Eds., Remote
Sensing of Urban Environment, 1999, pp. 123-136.
[12] P. V. P. C. Prasad, “Environmental Impact Assessment,”
Project Work, HUSA, IIRS, NRSA, 1990.
[13] J. R. Eastman, “Multi-Criteria Evaluation and GIS,” In: P.
A. Langley, M. F. Goodchild, D. J. Maguire and D. W.
Rhind, Eds., Geographical Information System, Vol. 1,
Principals and Technical Issues, 2002.
[14] K. K. Talukdar and B. Ramesh, “Assessment of Urban
Environment Quality Using Large Scale Aerial Photo-
graphs-Case Study in Dwarka, Delhi,” In: Proceedings,
Indian Society of Remote Sensing Silver Jubilee Sympo-
sium 1994-1995, Indian Institute of Remote Sensing, De-
hradun, 1995, pp. 250-257.
[15] Economic Survey of Delhi, 1999-2000. http://delhiplan-
ning.nic.in/Economic%20Survey/chapter_3.htm
[16] I. Kimhi, “Urban Environmental Quality,” The Centre for
Environmental Policy Studies Series #12, the Jerusalem
Institute for Israel Studies, Jerusalem, 2005. http://www.j
iis.org.il
[17] CSE (Centre for Science and Environment), “A people’s
model to clean air: Steering the way, Down to Earth,”

A. RAHMAN ET AL.
84
New Delhi, Vol. 11, No. 12, November 2002.
[18] J. E. Hardoy, D. Mitlin and D. Satterthwaite, “Environ-
mental Problems in Third World Cities,” Earthscan Pub-
lication, London, 1997.
[19] B. N. Haack, “Urban Analysis and Planning,” In: Manual
of Photographic Interpretation, 2nd Edition, W. R. Phil-
ipson, Editor-in-Chief, ASPRS, 1997.