After Court-Ordered Repairs, Bombay HC Quashes Slum Declaration On Mumbai Chawls That Had Remained Stayed For 34 Years

The petitioners, owners of two parcels at Village Mohili with six chawls, challenged a declaration under Section 4(1) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (“Slum Act”) and the related notification declaring the property a slum area.

The Slum Tribunal dismissed their appeal against the declaration and notification.

The petitioners later undertook repairs and constructed two additional toilets pursuant to this Court’s interim directions, which also required repairs to existing toilets, drainage and sewerage.

The petitioners produced documents stating that the work had been completed; those documents were not controverted.

The declaration had remained stayed, and no further action concerning the property had been taken by the relevant authorities for approximately 34 years.

The proceeding concerned the declaration of a slum area under Section 4(1) of the Slum Act and the statutory appeal against such a declaration under Section 4(3); the petitioners invoked this Court’s supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution.

The judgment did not rely on any cited precedent or set out a separate general legal test. Its decision rested on the record of compliance with the Court’s repair directions and the fact that the declaration had remained in abeyance without further action by the authorities.

The Tribunal had upheld the declaration after considering the poor condition of the toilets, inadequate water supply and other defects at the property.

However, this Court had subsequently directed repairs and construction of two additional toilets, and the petitioners produced uncontroverted material showing that the work was completed.

The Court also noted that the declaration had remained stayed and that neither the former competent authority nor the Slum Rehabilitation Authority had taken further action concerning the property.

In these circumstances, and considering that the improvements had been made long before the final hearing, the Court concluded that the declaration and notification should be set aside.

It also permitted the petitioners to withdraw all rent amounts deposited in Court, together with accrued interest, if any.

The Rule was made absolute, with no order as to costs.