(DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.)

1. In 1948 the Bombay Housing and Area Development Board became the owner of a large tract of land at Goregaon (West), Mumbai admeasuring 40 acres equivalent to 1,65,800 sq. meters. The Board had constructed 808 ground floor structures consisting of Patra chawls and each tenement admeasured 220 “ ” sq. ft. The area is now known as Siddharth Nagar. The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority came into existence on 5 December 1977. In 1984 a cooperative society representing the occupants was formed comprising of 663 out of 808 tenants. The Court has been informed that the number of occupants at present stands at 672. The rest of the occupants were rehabilitated in various other schemes.

2. The co-operative society representing the occupants entered into an agreement on 9 September 1986 with a developer – Lokhandwalla Society and Development Company Limited – to develop a gross land area of 13.18 acres. Net of reservations the area was 10 acres. On 8 February 1988 the Government of Maharashtra issued a resolution by which it provided that out of the 40 acres of land owned by MHADA, a net area of 10 acres would be alloted to the cooperative society representing 673 occupants of the ground floor chawls in the low income group subject to the conditions inter alia that – (i) out of a total of 10 acres to be alloted to the society, 8 acres would be allotted free of costs; and (ii) the balance representing 2 Acres would be allotted at the present market rate to be fixed by the Town Planning Department. The developer constructed three buildings in 1991-92 comprising of a ground floor and four upper storeys. On 23 November 1992 the cooperative society terminated the agreement with the developer, the ground being inter alia that the earlier developer had offered accommodation admeasuring 325 sq. ft. of carpet area as opposed to 365 sq. ft. for each occupant. The developer instituted a suit on the Original Side of this Court (O.O.C.J. Suit 4476 of 1995). An ad interim injunction was granted by a Learned Single Judge on 12 December 1995. The Motion for interim relief was dismissed on 27 September 1996. The cooperative society thereafter passed a resolution on 1 September 2002 to enter into an agreement with a new developer, Guru Ashish Construction Private Limited (The Third Respondent in Writ Petition (Lodg.) 2690 of 2010). An appeal filed by the earlier developer against the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the Motion was rejected by the Division Bench on 8 December 2005. The cooperative society passed a resolution for the appointment of the new developer noted earlier on 22 January 2006. The Supreme Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition of the earlier developer against the judgment of the Division Bench on 10 April 2006. Eventually on 13 September 2007 a consent decree was passed in the suit instituted by the earlier developer by which all the rights and liabilities of the earlier developer were assigned in favour of the new developer.

3. The society and its newly appointed developer submitted a joint proposal for development on 26 September 2007 to MHADA. MHADA issued a resolution on 1 November 2007 sanctioning the redevelopment scheme. On 3 March 2008 the State Government granted its approval to redevelopment. On 1 April 2008 a tripartite agreement was entered into between the cooperative society, the newly appointed developer and MHADA. A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, (Writ Petition 1478 of 2009), was filed on behalf of 153 petitioners to challenge the proposal for redevelopment. A Division Bench of this Court by its order dated 9 June 2009 referred the case to the High Powered Committee and in the meantime, granted an ad interim injunction. The earlier writ petition was withdrawn on 1 February 2010. On 27 October 2010 68 occupants were served with a notice of eviction under Section 95A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority Act 1976. A