The prevalence of slums in large cities has been a cause of concern for policy makers. People living in slums face deprivation on several fronts and slum themselves can be seen as dwelling arrangements, which are inadequate and unfit for habitation. Several attempts have been made through a series of programs like VAMBAY and BSUP (in India) to rehabilitate slum-dwellers by moving them into houses that conform to the minimum acceptable living standards (as defined by their respective societies).However, there have been many reported incidences when slum-dwellers refused to move into the houses built for them. The problem is more pronounced in case of relocation of slums. Though there in no official statistics available on it; the magnitude of vacant houses all over India could be high in numbers. Such problems in relocation have been reported from other countries as well.Such wastage of resources beats the very objective of any rehabilitation program and raises serious concerns for policy makers as well as urban planners. Why should someone refuse to take a house with more than 90 percent subsidy? Is the inconvenience of relocating away from central city compensated adequately through ownership of a livable house? These are the key questions that have been explored in the study.Some of the key features of the study include its inter-disciplinary nature, a primary survey conducted in urban slums and its relevance for policy formulation. The field survey is urban slums had been particularly a tough challenge for the study.The Theory of Planned Behavior essentially deals with individual behavior only, and our study proposes an extension of the theory by incorporating group behavior under it. The extended model has been tested empirically and found strong support in favor of the additional construct proposed by us.This working paper shares my findings after completion of my doctoral research. Only summary has been shared here.