Advertisement
The Supreme Court on August 22, 2025, upheld a Bombay High Court verdict, ruling that a landowner has the first right among stakeholders to undertake redevelopment in a slum rehabilitation area. The court dismissed an argument from the Maharashtra government and the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) that the authority should have priority. The court's decision, which quashed a state notification for land acquisition in Mumbai's Kurla area, reaffirms the constitutional protection of ownership rights and sets a key precedent for future redevelopment projects.
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court on August 22, 2025, upheld a Bombay High Court verdict that quashed the Maharashtra government's land acquisition in Mumbai's Kurla area for a slum rehabilitation project. The court ruled that a landowner has the first right among all stakeholders to undertake redevelopment. This decision is a major setback for the Maharashtra government and the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), which had sought to acquire the land for redevelopment. Advertisement
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and N. K. Singh, rejected the argument of the Maharashtra government and the SRA. The bench said that while the SRA's power to redevelop may be subject to the rights of the landowner and the occupants, there is nothing in these provisions to create a preference for the authority over the rights of the landowner. The court upheld the June and July 2018 Bombay High Court judgments, which had ruled against the state's notification acquiring certain land belonging to Indian Corks Mill. The court said that a landowner of a slum rehabilitation area is not only entitled to the rights granted by the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, but also enjoys inherent rights attached to the ownership of the property.
The court also expressed concern about a situation where the slum dweller and the landowner submitted joint proposals. The August 22 judgment said that allowing the SRA to use its discretion in giving priority to a slum proposal may lead to discriminatory and arbitrary results motivated by other factors. The court also said that it could create an "unholy nexus" between the SRA and private developers, which could make slum dwellers more vulnerable to exploitation and could also result in unauthorized losses to the state's treasury. The court said that the real victims would be the slum dwellers themselves, who would be left in inhumane conditions. The court's ruling reinforces the constitutional protection of ownership rights, which can only be interfered with by a law.
5th Jun, 2025
25th May, 2023
11th May, 2023
27th Apr, 2023
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
