Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Rajendra R. Vishwakarma, was a slum dweller who received tenement no. 104 in 'A' wing of New Prabhat Cooperative Housing Society Ltd, Andheri (East), Mumbai, under a slum rehabilitation scheme. Respondent no. 6, Pradeep Dattatraya Bhaigade, filed a complaint alleging that the petitioner had illegally transferred the premises to Smt. Pratibha Vishwanath Shetty and that the premises were being used for commercial purposes. An inspection by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Department, SRA, revealed that the premises were in possession of Spun TV and used for commercial purposes, and that prior permission for transfer had not been obtained. The Additional Collector confirmed the petitioner's eviction, and the Grievance Redressal Committee dismissed the petitioner's appeal. The petitioner challenged the order dated 5.5.2018 under Article 226 of the Constitution. The court noted that the primary issue was profiteering from slum tenements through illegal transfer and commercial exploitation. The court upheld the eviction, finding that the transfer and commercial use violated the slum rehabilitation scheme under the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act, 1971.
Headnote
A) Slum Rehabilitation - Illegal Transfer - Prior Permission - Under Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - The petitioner, a slum dweller, transferred his residential tenement to a third party without prior permission of the competent authority, and the premises were used for commercial purposes by Spun TV. The court held that such transfer and use violated the slum rehabilitation scheme, and the eviction order was justified. (Paras 1-4) B) Profiteering - Commercial Exploitation - Slum Tenements - The primary issue was profiteering from tenements received by slum dwellers in a slum redevelopment scheme by illegal transfer and use purely for commercial exploitation. The court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal by the Grievance Redressal Committee. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner's eviction from a slum rehabilitation tenement for illegal transfer and commercial use was justified under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The order of the Grievance Redressal Committee dated 5.5.2018 is upheld.
Law Points
- Slum rehabilitation tenements cannot be transferred without prior permission of competent authority
- Residential premises under slum scheme cannot be used for commercial purposes
- Profiteering from slum tenements is illegal
- Grievance Redressal Committee's order dismissing appeal upheld
