SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 26097

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNIHON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARTI ARUN SATHE
VIJAY NAMDEV GUJAR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING – Respondent
WP/4836/2025



##PAGE1##

909-WP-4836-25.DOC

JYOTI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

RAJESH

MANE

Digitally signed by ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

JYOTI RAJESH

MANE

Date: 2025.12.23

19:49:57 +0530

WRIT PETITION NO.4836 OF 2025

Vijay Namdev Gujar ...Petitioner

Versus

The State Of Maharashtra,

Department Of Housing ...Respondents

_______

Mr. Prasad Dhakephalkar Senior Advocate (V.C.) a/w.Mr. Abhinav Bhatkar

i/b. Ms.Kavita Narvekar, for Petitioner.

Ms. Vrushali Kabre, AGP for Respondent No.1/State.

Mr. P.H.Kantharia, for Respondent Nos.2 to 6/SRA.

Mr. Kshitish Shukla for Respondent Nos.7 & 8.

Mr. Shakeep Shaikh, Ms. Afreen Thanevala i/b. Vis Legis Law Practice,

for Respondent No.9.

_______

CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &

AARTI SATHE, JJ.

DATE: 23 December 2025

P.C.

1. On 25th November 2025 we had passed a detailed order after hearing

learned counsel for the parties.

2. The issues before the Court in the present proceedings were twofold.

Firstly, Respondent No.9 had defaulted in the payment of transit rent.

Consequently, an inquiry was required to be undertaken by the Competent Officer

of the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (‘SRA’ for short) to determine the transit rent

payable to the Petitioners by Respondent No.9. The second issue pertained to the

possession of the tenements, as it was the case of the Petitioners that although the

Page 1 of 8

Mane

::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2025 20:28:59 :::

##PAGE2##

909-WP-4836-25.DOC

remaining Petitioners had been allotted their respective tenements, the keys thereof

were not handed over to them. In pursuance of the orders passed by this Court the

Competent Officer of the SRA viz. Assistant Registrar Co-operative Societies, has

passed an order dated 11th December 2025, whereby in respect of the 33

Petitioners an amount of Rs.3,59,24,701/- has been determined to be payable to

the Petitioners. Such amount would now be required to be paid, as the order is a

detailed and reasoned order passed after hearing all the parties and upon

consideration of all relevant facts, including the arrears of rent, which in fact

pertain to the period 2018–19. It is thus clear from the facts of the case that the

developer having avoided making payment of the rent had utilised the amounts

for the project, thereby depriving the basic entitlement of the Petitioners, to receive

such amounts, not only as per the agreement but also under the Rules and

Regulations and Circulars issued by the SRA. It is in such context we had made the

following observations in our order dated 25th November 2025:

2. The development in question is of a slum under the provisions of

Regulation 33(10) of Development Control and Promotion

Regulations, 2034 for Greater Mumbai.

3. The learned counsel for the developers-respondent nos.7 & 8

states that his client is ready and willing to pay the legitimate

amounts of transit rent which are due and payable. The calculation

in that regard is intended to be submitted to the Competent

Authority of the Slum Rehabilitation Authority. Let the petitioners

in that event also calculate the amount of arrears of transit rent and

place it for consideration of the Competent Officer.

4. In this view of the matter, in our opinion, it would be in the

interest of justice that the Competent Officer of the SRA intervenes

in the issue in regard to the amount of transit rent, which is due and

payable to the petitioners. Let a personal hearing in that regard be

granted by the Competent Officer, which shall be within two weeks

from today and an appropriate decision be taken on the rival

contentions and clear orders be passed on the amount of transit rent

being payable to the petitioners.

Page 2 of 8

Mane

::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2025 20:28:59 :::

##PAGE3##

909-WP-4836-25.DOC

5. In view of the fair stand taken on behalf of the developers of their

readiness and willingness to pay the amount due and payable as per

the rules, in fact further adjudication of the petition is not called for.

However, as the petitioners are slum dwellers, we cannot expect

them

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top