Back
G. S. KULKARNI, SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN
Byramjee Jeejeebhoy Private Limited, A Private Limited Company – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Somasekhar Sundaresan, J.) :
1. Rule. With the consent of the parties, taken up for final hearing and disposal.
2. This Petition is essentially a challenge to two orders dated 17th February, 2023 (collectively, “Impugned Order”) passed by the Apex Grievance Redressal Committee (“AGRC”), which has ruled that a proposal submitted by the Petitioners to redevelop a piece of land that had been declared as a slum rehabilitation area on 13th February, 2020, cannot be processed by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (“SRA”).
Factual Matrix:
3. The subject matter of this petition is the land situated at CTS No.472; 472/1 to 472/49; 479; and 484 situated in Poisar Village, Taluka-Borivali, Mumbai (“Subject Land”). The Subject Land, along with other neighbouring land, all of which having been encroached upon by slum dwellers, came be notified as a slum rehabilitation area under Section 3C of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (“Slum Act”).
4. A brief overview of the facts necessary for adjudicating this petition is summarised below:-
b) Laxmi R
The court established that a notice under Section 13 is mandatory for the 120-day period to commence, affirming the landowner's preferential right to develop slum rehabilitation areas.
State cannot acquire private land for slum rehabilitation without recognizing and allowing landowners' preferential rights to develop the land.
The court reaffirmed that the preferential right of a landowner over slum redevelopment schemes must be respected before any acquisition is initiated under relevant legislation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that once land is acquired by the State Government under the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act, it vests absolutely in the State Government free from all ....
The court affirmed that the Petitioners, claiming tribal allotment rights, failed to prove ownership of the land, thus upholding the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme's implementation and eviction orders.
The CEO/SRA has the authority to terminate a Developer under Section 13(2) of the Slum Act for delays and non-performance in the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme, emphasizing timely completion for public b....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
