JUDGMENT - LODHA R.M., J.:---Mr. Oka, learned Counsel for the petitioners has filed Counsel Note today stating therein that petitioner No. 1 has expired and his name may be deleted from the array of parties. In view of the Counsel Note submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, name of petitioner No. 1 Ramniklalbhai is allowed to be deleted from the array of parties. The learned Counsel for petitioners is directed to carry out the necessary amendment in the array of parties forthwith.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

3. Mr. A.B. Oka, learned Counsel for the petitioners, vehemently contends that the order passed by the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Tribunal, Bombay, on 22-8-1990 in Appeals Nos. 6/89, 7/89, 78/89, 79/89, 80/89, 81/89 and 83/89 cannot be sustained being in contravention of sub-section (4) of section 4 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (for short, 'the Slum Areas Act, 1971'). According to the learned Counsel, the order passed by the Maharashtra Slum Areas Tribunal on 22-8-1990 in Appeal No. 7/89 deserves to be quashed and set aside and the matter be sent back to the said Tribunal for proceeding with the appeal in accordance with law and upon compliance of sub-section (4) of section 4 of the Slum Areas Act, 1971, the appeal be heard and decided afresh.

4. Mr. Kulkarni, learned Counsel for respondents 4 to 7, on the other hand submits that by the impugned order the Maharashtra Slum Areas Tribunal has only remanded the matter back to the competent authority for making fresh enquiry before publishing the declaration under the Slum Areas Act of 1971 and, therefore, no interference deserves to be made in the impugned order.

5. Briefly stated facts are that the petitioners are occupying the various portions of the building known as 'Wali Building' situated in Sitabuldi, Nagpur, as tenants and the said building is owned by respondents 4 to 7. As usual the tenancy disputes between the landlords and the tenants in the said building had been going on for quite some time. The competent authority in exercise of the powers conferred under the Slum Areas Act of 1971 issued a notification dated 24-1-1976 which was published in the official gazette on 5-2-1976 declaring the said Wali Building and the adjacent buildings situated in Gawlipura, Tekadi, as slum area. The said notification dated 24-1-1976 which was published in the official gazette on 5-2-1976, whereby the Wali Building came to be declared as slum improvement area, came to be challenged by the owners of Wali Building, namely respondents 4 to 7 herein, by filing an appeal under section 4(3) of the Slum Areas Act of 1971 before the Maharashtra Slum Areas Tribunal, Bombay, in the month of December 1988. The said appeal was registered as Appeal No. 7/89. The Tribunal considered the said appeal along with other appeals and held that since the persons whose rights in the immovable property were affected by the said notification have not been noticed nor their objections invited nor considered, the notification dated 24-1-1976 published on 5-2-1976 in the official gazette was in contravention of the provisions of law and accordingly quashed the notification dated 24-1-1976 published on 5-2-1976 and sent the matter back to the competent authority for making fresh enquiry after issuing show cause notices to the affected persons and hearing the objections from them and then passing the speaking order accordingly.

6. The Slum Areas Act of 1971 came into force with effect from 11-8-1971. The Act was enacted for making better provision for the improvement and clearance of slum areas in the State and the redevelopment and also for protection of occupiers from eviction and in that background it was found expedient to make the provisions relating thereto. The Act defines, building, occupier, owner, slum area and works of improvement in section 2(b), (e), (f), (g) and (j) respectivel

Click Here to Read the rest of this document