Petitioner challenged eviction notice and sought stay in slum rehabilitation project. Holders must prove eligibility though project must proceed. Stay of eviction notice denied.
Direction to Authority to consider and decide claims within four weeks; ad-interim stay of eviction notice vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Sherla V.
wpl.3371.2019_10.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J.
WRIT PETITION (LODGING) NO.3371 OF 2019
Sabula Buden Khan & others … Petitioners
Vs
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & … Respondents others
Mr.M.M. Abdi for the Petitioners
Ms.K.H. Mastakar for Respondent – Corporation
Mr.M.A. Sayyed, AGP, for Respondent Nos.2 to 4
Mr.Kunal Chheda with Chetan Mhatre i/b M/s.Utangale & Co. for Respondent No.5 (SRA)
Mr.Chetan Kapadia with Ms.Deepa Bisht, Mr.Chirag Sarawagi i/b Mr.Tushar Goradia for Respondent No.6
CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & R.I. CHAGLA, JJ.
DATED: JANUARY 6, 2020
seeking the following reliefs:
“a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the
Page 1 of 5
wpl.3371.2019_10.doc
Respondent No.3 to expediently determine the claim of eligibility of the Petitioner in accordance with GR dated 16.05.2015 and GR dated 16.05.2018. at Exhibit B and C.
b) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the notice dated 06.08.2018 issued by Respondent No.3. at Exhibit K.
c) That this Hon’ble court be pleased to direct the Respondent No.3 to allow the Petitioners herein to re-submit their relevant documents before Respondent No.3 in accordance with GR dated 16.05.2015 and GR dated 16.05.2018.
d) Pending hearing to direct Respondent No.3 to hear Petitioner Nos.3, 8, 11, 12 and 13 to expeditiously hear the application of the Petitioners by considering GR dated 16.05.2015 and 16.05.2018.
e) Pending hearing and final disposition of this Petition, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to Stay Eviction Notice dated 06.08.2018 at Exhibit K.
f) Ad-interim reliefs in terms of prayer clause (c), (d) and (e).
g) For such other and further orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of this case.
h) For costs of this Petition.”
the notice which has been issued by the Slum Rehabilitation
Authority. That notice is at page 293 of the paperbook. That refers to the annexures which are required to be maintained by the
Page 2 of 5
wpl.3371.2019_10.doc
Authority so as to certify the slum dwellers as eligible for the rehabilitation package. The notice says that the petitioners are ineligible. They were desirous of seeking a permanent alternate accommodation for their residence.
Page 3 of 5
wpl.3371.2019_10.doc
the scheme for rehabilitation of the slum dwellers has to be implemented by demolishing the existing structures at site. The slum rehabilitation project is then implemented by construction of what is styled as rehabilitation building. In that rehabilitation building, all eligible slum dwellers have to be provided with permanent alternate accommodation. If apart from the eligible slum dwellers, there are other slums at the site, the dwellers thereof have to establish and prove their eligibility by approaching the Competent Authority with the documentary evidence. The Slum Rehabilitation Authority is not expected to wait till all claims of the slum dwellers at site are decided, for, then it will be impossible for the Slum Rehabilitation Authority as also the Developer to implement the project. Those who have vacated their structures or handed over them for demolition voluntarily to the Developer and the Authority, cannot suffer merely because parties like the petitioners are yet to establish and prove their eligibility. The law is crystal clear that if the petitioners succeed in establishing and proving their eligibility, they will be accommodated in the ongoing project by providing permanent alternate
Page 4 of 5
wpl.3371.2019_10.doc
accommodation as being eligible for residential accommodation or in some other scheme adjoining the site where the existing or present scheme is being implemented. When such was the position known to the petitioners and their Counsel, we do not see how they would have been eligible or entitled prima facie to any interim relief muchless in terms of prayer clause (e) of the petition. That would mean the project cannot go ahead and its implementation is stalled.
(R.I. CHAGLA, J.) (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)
Vishwanath S. Sherla
Digitally signed by Vishwanath S. Sherla Date: 2020.01.10 11:06:12 +0530
Page 5 of 5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an eviction notice in an ongoing slum rehabilitation project can be stayed while eligibility claims are pending.
Whether the petitioners were entitled to interim relief regarding the stay of an eviction notice.
Sabula Buden Khan
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
S.C. DHARMADHIKARI
R.I. CHAGLA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
