“How Can Adjoining Land Decide?”: Bombay HC Pulls Up SRA on Slum Tag

The Bombay High Court has questioned the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) on how private land with only a handful of structures could be declared a slum just because it is next to an already notified slum.

A Bench of Justices GS Kulkarni and Manjusha Deshpande was hearing a petition filed by Ramesh Singh, a Malad resident, who said that the SRA had issued him a notice declaring his 440 sq. m. land as a slum. The land, which has only 5–6 structures, is marked for a garden and DP road in Mumbai’s Development Plan 2034. Singh argued that his property was wrongly clubbed with an adjoining slum housing over 120 residents.

On September 2, the Court granted Singh interim protection, ordering that status quo be maintained. This means his land cannot be included in any slum rehabilitation project until the final decision is made.

The judges directed the CEO of the SRA to personally file an affidavit explaining the legal basis for classifying Singh’s plot as a slum. The Court also expressed surprise when SRA’s counsel claimed that such decisions were not taken by the CEO but by subordinate officers. The Bench asked the CEO to clarify this in his affidavit.

When the matter came up again on September 9, the Court rejected SRA’s attempt to file an affidavit through its Deputy Chief Engineer and reiterated that the CEO himself must submit the response. The affidavit is to be filed within a week, and the next hearing is scheduled for September 24.

The petition challenges a notice issued in November 2024 under Section 13 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act, which gives SRA powers to develop notified slum areas. Singh relied on an earlier High Court order from August 2024 that had upheld his right to develop his land and restrained the SRA from forcibly including it in a slum scheme.

Until the matter is resolved, the Court has ordered that Singh’s land remain outside any slum rehabilitation project. At the same time, it has allowed redevelopment of the adjoining notified slum, provided it follows the law.

Advocates Sankalp A Sharma and Ameya Vaidya, along with Advocate Karthic Iyer, represented the petitioner. Advocate Ravleen Sabharwal appeared for the SRA, Additional Government Pleader Rakesh Pathak represented the State, and Advocate KH Mastakar (briefed by Advocate Komal Punjabi) appeared for the BMC.

Case Title: Ramesh Swaminath Singh v. SRA & Ors