The Supreme Court has paved the way for the redevelopment of the Bharat Nagar slum in Bandra, dismissing an appeal by residents observing that the dwellers were resorting to “dilatory tactics” to stall the project. Some had opposed the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) scheme, claiming they were Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) tenants, not slum dwellers.
Hearing their plea against the Bombay High Court’s January 4, 2023, order upholding SRA’s eviction notice, the SC ruled, “The appellants have only been using dilatory tactics to delay the project as they were found to be ineligible slum dwellers.”
The SRA had issued the eviction notice under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act. The residents challenged it before the Apex Grievance Redressal Committee (AGRC), arguing the plot was a MHADA layout and should be redeveloped under Regulation 33(5) of the Development Control Regulations (DCR), not under slum redevelopment Regulation 33(10).
On June 12, 2019, AGRC dismissed their claims, stating MHADA had consistently maintained that the plot was never part of its designated layout. It also clarified that residents had paid transit fees and service charges, not rent.
The AGRC noted that some appellants had raised similar objections in a 2010 petition, which was dismissed by the high court in 2011. Yet, they never challenged the AGRC’s 2019 order and instead filed complaints against Bharat Ekta Cooperative Society, the body representing 261 eligible slum dwellers in the redevelopment.
“The High Court rightly disbelieves the appellants’ claim that they were unaware of the AGRC order,” the SC noted.
Sanctioned in 2010, the project involves merging three plots. While Phase I is complete, Phase II stalled when appellants resisted vacating their premises. They also claimed the plot was never declared a slum. The SC rejected this, stating, “The project relates to a ‘censused slum’ and does not require a separate notification under Section 4 of the Slum Act.”
MHADA, which owns the land, had granted a No Objection Certificate (NOC) for redevelopment under SRA. “It may be a MHADA property technically, but over the years, it has grown as a slum and, therefore, for purely practical reasons, it needed to be developed by SRA,” the court said.
SRA informed the High Court that 2,965 slum structures were surveyed, with 2,625 found eligible for rehabilitation. More than 70% of eligible residents had already consented.
Some appellants, initially ineligible, were later granted eligibility but rejected the accommodation offered, demanding redevelopment by MHADA instead. “Their motive is clear — they seek larger accommodation under MHADA’s scheme rather than the standard rehabilitation housing offered to slum dwellers,” the SC observed.
With the project at an advanced stage, the SC ruled, “At this stage, disturbing the ongoing project would defeat the entire purpose of redevelopment, which is set to benefit a large number of eligible slum dwellers.”
The court also noted that only four appellants had initially approached the High Court, while others had joined the SC appeal later. “These are fence-sitters who have directly approached this court claiming to be affected by the High Court’s order, even though they were never a party before the High Court,” the bench remarked.
Dismissing the appeal, the SC cleared the way for redevelopment to proceed.
