MANSOOR ALI FARIDA IRSHAD ALI & OTHERS versus THE TAHSILDAR-I, SPECIAL CELL & OTHERS

MANSOOR ALI FARIDA IRSHAD ALI & OTHERS versus THE TAHSILDAR-I, SPECIAL CELL & OTHERS

The AGRC's 12.06.2019 order dismissing the appellants' challenge attained finality; the appellants' contention that the plot is a MHADA layout requiring redevelopment under Regulation 33(5) has no substance because MHADA consistently stated it was not a MHADA layout and granted a NOC to SRA; the plot is a censused slum (censused in 1981) and therefore falls within the definition of slums under Regulation 33(10) of the DCR so no separate notification under the Slum Act was necessary; appellants were ineligible transit camp occupants who employed dilatory tactics and cannot derail a sanctioned redevelopment project; appeals dismissed.

Parties
Appellants: Mansoor Ali Farida Irshad Ali & Others; Respondents: The Tahsildar-I, Special Cell & Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
27 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Judgment and Order Dated 04.01.2023 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in WPL No. 38237 of 2022
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Censused Slum, Slum Rehabilitation Authority (sra), Redevelopment, Slum Area, Rehabilitation Scheme, Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai, Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (mhada), Apex Grievance Redressal Committee (agrc), Eligibility for Rehabilitation, Transit Camp Tenants, MHADA Layout, Eviction, Notification Under Slum Act
Slum Rehabilitation Housing Law Development Control Regulations Censused Slum Slum Rehabilitation Authority (sra) Redevelopment Slum Area Rehabilitation Scheme +8 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mansoor Ali Farida Irshad Ali & Others

Appellants

The Tahsildar-I, Special Cell & Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From the Judgment and Order Dated 04.01.2023 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in WPL No. 38237 of 2022

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plot is a MHADA layout
  2. 2 Whether the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) is competent to redevelop a censused slum situated on MHADA land under Regulation 33(10) of the DCR
  3. 3 Whether ineligible transit camp occupants can delay a sanctioned redevelopment project by invoking Regulation 33(5) applicable to MHADA layouts

Ratio Decidendi

The AGRC's 12.06.2019 order dismissing the appellants' challenge attained finality; the appellants' contention that the plot is a MHADA layout requiring redevelopment under Regulation 33(5) has no substance because MHADA consistently stated it was not a MHADA layout and granted a NOC to SRA; the plot is a censused slum (censused in 1981) and therefore falls within the definition of slums under Regulation 33(10) of the DCR so no separate notification under the Slum Act was necessary; appellants were ineligible transit camp occupants who employed dilatory tactics and cannot derail a sanctioned redevelopment project; appeals dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Delay condoned
  • I.A.(s) seeking permission to file Special Leave Petitions allowed