Consent of Slum Dwellers for Slum Redevelopment by Owner
The petitioner is the public trust. The subject property was donated to the petitioner trust.
Respondent No.5 is the proposed society of alleged slum dwellers and respondent no.6 claims to be its chief promoter.
Respondent nos.5 and 6 had unilaterally and illegally appointed the develop for slum rehabilitation redevelopment of the subject property. They had filed section 14(1) of the Slum Act for acquisition of the property. The said application was rejected on 30.5.2012.
On 13.10.2016, the respondent nos.5 and 6 filed another proposal under section 14(1) and same was also rejected on 14.3.2017.
On 22.1.2018, the respondent nos.5 and 6 called the petitioner submit the redevelopment proposal of CTS Nos.611 and 613 and to deposit corpus of Rs.9 crores.
On 7.2.2020, the proposal of the petitioner was submitted under Regulation 33(1) of the DCR and the Circular No.144A.
On 27.7.2021, the SRA issued in principle acceptance of the petitioner’s proposal for redevelopment. This was challenged before the AGRC – Apex Grievance Redressal Committee. In the said application, the respondent nos.7 to 9 filed intervention application.
On 25.8.2023, the respondent nos.5 and 6 filed section 13(2) for change of the petitioner as developer.
The said application of the respondent nos.5 and 6 and the order of acceptance of the petitioner’s proposal was set aside on the ground that the said proposal was without consent and general body resolution of the society as per Circular No.144.
Indeed, under Circular No.144 issued by the SRA, it was necessary to examine whether 70% of the occupants had given their consent to participate in the redevelopment scheme and supported the resolution to appoint a developer. 42. However, by Circular No. 144A, which was issued by the SRA in recognition of the preferential rights of the land owner to implement the SR Scheme under Section 13(1) of the Slum Act, 1971, modifications were made to the said Circular No. 144. Inter alia, the condition of the necessity of submitting of Annexure – 5 spelling out the consent of 70% of the occupants stood relaxed.
Circular No. 144A thus dispenses with, the requirement of the consent of the occupants for the implementation of the SR Scheme where the scheme is implemented by the owner, in exercise of its preferential right to develop the property over which the slum stands.
The preferential right of the landlord to implement the SR Scheme under Section 13(1) of the Slum Act, 1971 would trigger after the land is declared as a slum rehabilitation area. The corresponding obligation of the landlord to evince interest (upon being put to notice) to develop the slum rehabilitation area arises only after a declaration is made under Section 3C(1) of the Slum Act, 1971.
Judgment dated 8.1.2026 of the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.11550 of 2025 of N. D. Bhuta Charities Vs. Apex Grievance Redressal Committee and others
Circular NO.144A of SAR governs the landowner – driven slum rehabilitation scheme relaxing the requirement of consent of the slum dwellers. However, the respondent no.1 Apex Grievance Redressal Committee of SRA wrongly applied Circular No.144 requiring consent of the slum dwellers to the proposal of the owner for redevelopment.
