The Bombay High Court has ordered the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) to swiftly resolve a 25-year-old redevelopment dispute involving tenants of a property in Mahim (West).
The court’s directive came after years of inaction from the authorities, which left tenants without an Occupation Certificate (OC) and facing undue hardships. On August 13, a division bench consisting of Justices Mahesh S. Sonak and Kamal R. Khata sharply criticised BMC and MHADA for their role in allowing this situation to persist. The judges expressed their discontent with the fact that both agencies had shifted the responsibility of the developer’s failure to the tenants, instead of holding the developer accountable for not complying with the necessary redevelopment conditions. The court highlighted that this approach not only caused distress to the tenants but also reflected a serious lapse in public governance.
The long-standing issue centres around a plot in Mahim, originally developed in 1946, which included three chawls, nine shops, and nine residential units. In 1986, a private company acquired the property and undertook its redevelopment. The tenants, who vacated their homes and businesses in anticipation of improved facilities, were promised that their shops would be housed in the front wing of the new development, while residential units and salable flats would be situated in the rear wing.
However, despite handing over the shops to the tenants in March 1997, the developer failed to secure the OC, leading BMC to withhold essential services such as water and sewerage. Additionally, the tenants were burdened with a 150% surcharge on property taxes. BMC attributed the delay in issuing the OC to MHADA’s failure to provide a final No Objection Certificate (NOC). The court condemned this bureaucratic impasse, noting that the tenants should not have been left to suffer due to the inefficiency and inaction of the authorities involved. The judges underscored that as public entities, both BMC and MHADA had a duty to protect the rights of the tenants rather than exacerbate their difficulties.
The court ordered MHADA to issue a NOC to the petitioners by August 30, facilitating the issuance of the OC by BMC by September 20. Furthermore, the judges instructed MHADA to either ensure the developer surrenders the required floor space or compensates its market value. BMC was also directed to reconcile the payments made by the tenants and refund any excess amounts related to additional municipal taxes. This ruling by the Bombay High Court marks a critical step towards addressing a dispute that has caused significant distress to the affected tenants. It also serves as a stark reminder of the need for greater accountability and efficiency within public authorities to prevent such prolonged disputes in the future.
