Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Sreepati Built Infras Investment Ltd., a developer, challenged the order dated 29/4/2017 passed by the High Power Committee (respondent No.7) constituted under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 and the Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai, 1991. The Committee had directed the replacement of the petitioner with respondent No.5, M/s. Omkar Realtors Mahalaxmi Project LLP, as the developer for a slum rehabilitation project in Ramdev Nagar, Parel, Mumbai. The petitioner contended that the Committee lacked jurisdiction to decide such disputes and that its decision was arbitrary. The respondents, including the Slum Rehabilitation Authority and the proposed society of slum dwellers, argued that the Committee had the power to resolve disputes and that the petitioner had failed to obtain the consent of the slum dwellers and complete the project. The court held that the High Power Committee has the jurisdiction to decide disputes between developers and slum dwellers, and its decision is not subject to challenge under Article 226 unless there is a jurisdictional error or violation of natural justice. The court found that the petitioner had not performed its obligations and that the Committee's decision to replace the developer based on the majority consent of the slum dwellers was valid. The writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Slum Rehabilitation - High Power Committee Jurisdiction - The High Power Committee constituted under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 and DCR 1991 has the jurisdiction to decide disputes between developers and slum dwellers, including the replacement of a developer. The Committee's decision is not subject to challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution unless there is a jurisdictional error or violation of natural justice. (Paras 1-10)
B) Slum Rehabilitation - Developer's Rights - A developer does not have a vested right to continue with a slum rehabilitation project if it fails to perform its obligations, including obtaining consent of the slum dwellers and completing the project within a reasonable time. The Committee's decision to replace the developer with another is valid. (Paras 11-20)
C) Slum Rehabilitation - Consent of Slum Dwellers - The consent of the slum dwellers is a crucial factor in slum rehabilitation projects. The Committee's decision based on the majority consent of the slum dwellers to replace the developer is valid. (Paras 21-30)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Power Committee constituted under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 and the Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai, 1991 has the jurisdiction to decide disputes between developers and slum dwellers, and whether its decision to replace the petitioner-developer with respondent No.5 is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The order of the High Power Committee dated 29/4/2017 is upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- High Power Committee has jurisdiction to decide disputes between developers and slum dwellers
- Committee's decision not subject to challenge under Article 226 if no jurisdictional error
- Developer cannot claim vested right after failing to perform obligations
Case Details
Writ Petition No.2338 of 2018 with Chamber Summons No.32 of 2018 and Notice of Motion No.214 of 2018
B. P. Dharmadhikari, Revati Mohite Dere
Mr. S. G. Surana for the Petitioner, Mr. A. Y. Sakhare senior counsel a/w Ms. Trupti Puranik for Respondent No.3 MCGM, Dr. Milind Sathe Senior counsel a/w Mr. Aftab Diamondwala and Ms. Asha Nair i/b Diamondwala & Co. for Respondent No.5, Mr. V. D. Patil for Respondent No.4, Mr. Vineet Naik senior counsel a/w Mr. Paras Gujar i/b Mr. J. R. Vyas for Respondent No.6, Mr. J. G. Reddy (Aradwad) a/w Mr. Arvind Aswani for Respondent No.7, Mr. Hemant Haryan AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2
M/s. Sreepati Built Infras Investment Ltd.
State of Maharashtra, Principal Secretary Urban Development Department, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Slum Rehabilitation Authority, M/s. Omkar Realtors Mahalaxmi Project LLP, Ramdev Nagar Cooperative Housing Society (Proposed), High Power Committee
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the High Power Committee replacing the petitioner-developer with another developer in a slum rehabilitation project.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought quashing of the order dated 29/4/2017 passed by the High Power Committee and a direction to allow the petitioner to continue as the developer.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was aggrieved by the decision of the High Power Committee to replace it with respondent No.5 as the developer for the slum rehabilitation project.
Previous Decisions
The High Power Committee had passed an order on 29/4/2017 directing the replacement of the petitioner with respondent No.5.
Issues
Whether the High Power Committee has jurisdiction to decide disputes between developers and slum dwellers?
Whether the decision of the High Power Committee to replace the petitioner-developer with respondent No.5 is sustainable in law?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the High Power Committee lacked jurisdiction and its decision was arbitrary.
Respondents argued that the Committee had jurisdiction and the petitioner had failed to perform its obligations.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Power Committee constituted under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 and DCR 1991 has the jurisdiction to decide disputes between developers and slum dwellers. A developer does not have a vested right to continue with a slum rehabilitation project if it fails to perform its obligations. The Committee's decision based on the majority consent of the slum dwellers is valid and not subject to challenge under Article 226 unless there is a jurisdictional error or violation of natural justice.
Judgment Excerpts
Considering the nature of controversy and earlier orders passed, with consent of parties the matter has been heard finally by issuing Rule and making it returnable forthwith.
The petitioner is a developer who challenges the order dated 29/4/2017 passed by respondent No.7.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.2338 of 2018 challenging the order of the High Power Committee dated 29/4/2017. The matter was heard finally with consent of parties and judgment reserved on 15/01/2019 and pronounced on 29/01/2019.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971:
- Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai, 1991:
- Constitution of India: Article 226
