JUDGMENT :

SURYA KANT, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The dispute under consideration in these Civil Appeals concerns the validity of the acquisition of a portion of land located at CTS No. B-960 in Village Bandra, Taluka Andheri, Mumbai, measuring 1,596.40 sq. m. (Subject Land) under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (Slums Act). The High Court of Judicature at Bombay (High Court), vide the Impugned Judgment dated 11.06.2024, has: (i) allowed the writ petition filed by the landowner, declaring the acquisition void and (ii) directed the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) to consider the proposal of the landowner for redevelopment. The instant appeals have thus been preferred by the proposed housing society of slum dwellers, the developer selected by the said society, and the SRA.

3. The instant appeals involve an in-depth analysis of the text as well as the legislative policy behind Chapter I-A of the Slums Act, specifically regarding the rights of landowners to redevelop a Slum Rehabilitation Area (SR Area) and the corresponding duties of the SRA. At the outset, we note that by a Judgment of even date, titled Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others, Supreme Court of India, Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 19774 of 2018, Judgment dated 22.08.2025 a 2-Judge Bench of this Court, including one of us (Surya Kant, J.), has dealt with a substantial part of the arguments raised in these appeals. The Bench, therein, upheld the decision of another Division Bench of the High Court in Indian Cork Mills (P) Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, 2018 SCC Online Bom 1214 laying down that: (i) the private owner of a Slum Rehabilitation Area has a preferential right to develop it; (ii) as part of this right, the owner must be notified and invited to undertake such redevelopment and (iii) without such notice being issued and such right being extinguished, it would be untenable for the State or the SRA to acquire the land under Section 14 .

4. The legislative interpretation we are tasked with undertaking in these appeals has largely been addressed by the Bench in Tarabai (supra). Having previously examined the law regarding the questions answered therein, this Court does not need to revisit the analysis of the Slums Act. The only remaining issue for us to consider through this Judgment is the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) (Amendment) Act, 2017 (2018 Amendment).

(A) LEGISLATIVE SCHEME

5. The legislative scheme of the Slums Act prior to the 2018 Amendment has already been detailed extensively in Tarabai (supra).³ [See Paragraphs 5 to 38 of Tarabai (supra)] However, before delving into the facts of this case, it would be apposite to first explore the impact of the said Amendment on the slum rehabilitation framework envisaged in Chapter I-A of the Slums Act.

6. The Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) (Amendment) Act, 2017, which came into force on 26.04.2018, was enacted to improve the practical implementation of the Slums Act and to expand the scope of slum rehabilitation. It introduced various improvements, both significant and minor, into the legislative framework for slum rehabilitation.

7. Section 3B is one of the key areas where such a change was implemented.⁴ [For pre-2018 Amendment version, see Paragraph 19 of Tarabai (supra)]

7.1. In sub-section (1), the Legislature introduced the ability for the SRA to amend an already operative General Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (General SR Scheme).

7.2. Further, the provisions which, prior to the Amendment, were included in sub-section (4)⁵ [See Paragraph 19 of Ta