# Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v. The State of Maharashtra and Others

- **Citation:** 2025 INSC 1015
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2025-08-22
- **Case number:** Civil Appeal No. 11014 of 2025
- **Bench:** Surya Kant, Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/tarabai-nagar-co-op-hog-society-proposed-v-the-state-of-maharashtra-and-others-38598
- **Pages:** 48

## Headnote

Whether the owner of the land in a Slum Rehabilitation Area (SR
Area) has any preferential right to redevelop it under Chapter I-A
of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971; whether such preferential right, if any,
entails that the owner be specially notified and invited to redevelop
the SR Area before the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) takes
a decision u/s.13 r/w s.3D(b)(iii), Slums Act; whether the power
of the State Government to acquire land u/s.14 r/w s.3D(c)(i),
Slums Act is subject to the preferential right, if any, of the owner;
whether, in the facts of the instant case, the acquisition of the
Subject Land by the State Government has rightly been set aside
by the High Court.
Headnotes†
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - Chapter I-A - By way of the
impugned judgement, High Court held that the scheme of
Chapter I-A of the Slums Act creates a preferential right in
favour of the owner of an SR Area to redevelop it - Whether
the owner of the land in a SR Area has any preferential right
to redevelop it under Chapter I-A:
Held: A landowner has the first right among stakeholders to
undertake redevelopment under an SR Scheme - Owner's right
to develop an SR Area, holds preference over that of the SRA
within Chapter I-A of the Slums Act - ss.3B(4)(e) and 13(1) make
it clear that the SRA's power to undertake redevelopment can only
be invoked if the owner extinguishes its right to redevelop - s.13
has its own measure to balance the rights of slum dwellers, by
imposing the restriction of 'reasonable time' on the owner's right
* Author
1194
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
to redevelop - The SRA cannot undertake development of the
SR Area unless the owner fails to come forward with a scheme
within a reasonable time - SRA has recognised the legislative
preference granted to the owner or landlord in Circular No. 144-A
dated 09.11.2015, which stipulates that "the first right to file the
Slum Rehabilitation scheme is of the owner of the land" - By
relaxing the requirement of consent of seventy percent of the slum
occupants, it depicts a clear intention on behalf of the SRA that
the occupants cannot override the owner's proposal for an SR
Scheme - Impugned judgement upheld. [Paras 51, 53, 61, 63, 107]
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - Whether the preferential right of
the owner, if any, entails that the owner be specially notified
and invited to redevelop the SR Area before the SRA takes a
decision u/s.13 r/w s.3D(b)(iii), Slums Act:
Held: Though, the Gazette notification or a public notice in
newspapers shall be deemed to have informed an owner
regarding the s.3C(1) Declaration however, it will be far-fetched
and preposterous to further assume that such owner is also
obligated to submit a redevelopment scheme when the said
notification does not invite the owner to submit any proposal -
Mere declaration of an area as an SR Area does not amount to
inviting the landowner to redevelop the land, and the publication
of the former cannot attract the consequences attributable to
the latter - Mere declaration of an area as an SR Area does
not amount to inviting the landowner to redevelop the land, and
the publication of the former cannot attract the consequences
attributable to the latter - Considering the dire consequences
potentially suffered by the owner upon inadvertent failure to
exercise its preferential right and the SRA's previous notices, the
requirement for a specific notice inviting the owner to submit an
SR Scheme, as prescribed in the Impugned Judgement, must
be read as mandatory. [Paras 69, 75]
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - s.14 vis-à-vis s.13 - Power of State
Government to acquire land - Power of Competent Authority
to redevelop clearance area - Whether the power of the State
Government to acquire land u/s.14 r/w s.3D(c)(i), Slums Act is
subject t

## Text

_Characters 0–39,908 of 102,275. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39908 for what follows._

[2025] 8 S.C.R. 1193 : 2025 INSC 1015
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed)
v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
(Civil Appeal No. 11014 of 2025)
22 August 2025
[Surya Kant* and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the owner of the land in a Slum Rehabilitation Area (SR
Area) has any preferential right to redevelop it under Chapter I-A
of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971; whether such preferential right, if any,
entails that the owner be specially notified and invited to redevelop
the SR Area before the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) takes
a decision u/s.13 r/w s.3D(b)(iii), Slums Act; whether the power
of the State Government to acquire land u/s.14 r/w s.3D(c)(i),
Slums Act is subject to the preferential right, if any, of the owner;
whether, in the facts of the instant case, the acquisition of the
Subject Land by the State Government has rightly been set aside
by the High Court.
Headnotes†
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - Chapter I-A - By way of the
impugned judgement, High Court held that the scheme of
Chapter I-A of the Slums Act creates a preferential right in
favour of the owner of an SR Area to redevelop it - Whether
the owner of the land in a SR Area has any preferential right
to redevelop it under Chapter I-A:
Held: A landowner has the first right among stakeholders to
undertake redevelopment under an SR Scheme - Owner's right
to develop an SR Area, holds preference over that of the SRA
within Chapter I-A of the Slums Act - ss.3B(4)(e) and 13(1) make
it clear that the SRA's power to undertake redevelopment can only
be invoked if the owner extinguishes its right to redevelop - s.13
has its own measure to balance the rights of slum dwellers, by
imposing the restriction of 'reasonable time' on the owner's right
* Author
1194
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
to redevelop - The SRA cannot undertake development of the
SR Area unless the owner fails to come forward with a scheme
within a reasonable time - SRA has recognised the legislative
preference granted to the owner or landlord in Circular No. 144-A
dated 09.11.2015, which stipulates that "the first right to file the
Slum Rehabilitation scheme is of the owner of the land" - By
relaxing the requirement of consent of seventy percent of the slum
occupants, it depicts a clear intention on behalf of the SRA that
the occupants cannot override the owner's proposal for an SR
Scheme - Impugned judgement upheld. [Paras 51, 53, 61, 63, 107]
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - Whether the preferential right of
the owner, if any, entails that the owner be specially notified
and invited to redevelop the SR Area before the SRA takes a
decision u/s.13 r/w s.3D(b)(iii), Slums Act:
Held: Though, the Gazette notification or a public notice in
newspapers shall be deemed to have informed an owner
regarding the s.3C(1) Declaration however, it will be far-fetched
and preposterous to further assume that such owner is also
obligated to submit a redevelopment scheme when the said
notification does not invite the owner to submit any proposal -
Mere declaration of an area as an SR Area does not amount to
inviting the landowner to redevelop the land, and the publication
of the former cannot attract the consequences attributable to
the latter - Mere declaration of an area as an SR Area does
not amount to inviting the landowner to redevelop the land, and
the publication of the former cannot attract the consequences
attributable to the latter - Considering the dire consequences
potentially suffered by the owner upon inadvertent failure to
exercise its preferential right and the SRA's previous notices, the
requirement for a specific notice inviting the owner to submit an
SR Scheme, as prescribed in the Impugned Judgement, must
be read as mandatory. [Paras 69, 75]
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - s.14 vis-à-vis s.13 - Power of State
Government to acquire land - Power of Competent Authority
to redevelop clearance area - Whether the power of the State
Government to acquire land u/s.14 r/w s.3D(c)(i), Slums Act is
subject to the preferential right, if any, of the owner:
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
1195
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
Held: The owner has a preferential right over other stakeholders
to develop an SR Area - If the owner then chooses to exercise
this right by submitting and implementing a valid SR Scheme,
issues involving rights over the property would not arise - It is,
thus, not fathomable that when the landowner is implementing
an SR Scheme on its own, a necessity to acquire the land could
arise - Rather, any process to acquire the land shall have to be
kept in abeyance till such time as the owner's preferential right
to develop it stands extinguished - Since it is open to the owner
to file its own SR Scheme within a reasonable time and the
proposal of the owner, if valid and complete, would take primacy,
it cannot be said that there is any legal necessity to acquire the
land - If acquisition is allowed to take place at this stage, it will
jeopardise the preferential right of the landowner - It is only when
the owner declines to undertake development or to support any
third-party development, thereby foregoing its preferential right,
that such a necessity would actually arise - Thus, as long as
the owner is willing to undertake development in exercise of its
preferential right, the acquisition cannot proceed - This can also
be harmoniously read in conjunction with the requirement for a
notice-cum-invitation to the owner in s.13 - When an SR Area
has been notified u/s.3C(1) of Chapter I-A and its development
through an SR Scheme is conceptualised, where-under there is an
inbuilt preferential right of an owner to carry out redevelopment, the
power of acquisition u/s.14 would not operate in an independent
silo; rather, it must derive meaning and effect from the principles
prevailing throughout the legislative scheme of Chapter I-A -
The owner possesses a preferential right to redevelop the SR
Area - SRA is duty-bound to invite the owner to submit an SR
Scheme and acquisition is not warranted until such right stands
extinguished. [Paras 83, 84, 87, 88]
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - Chapter I-A - Validity of the
acquisition of land - Indian Cork Mills Private Limited
(ICM) was the owner of the subject land, over time, it was
encroached upon by hutment dwellers, and a portion of it
was declared as a 'Slum Area' u/s.4 - The slum expanded
and its dwellers formed the co-operative housing societyappellant - Thereafter, entire subject land was declared as
SR area through a s.3C(1) Declaration - Appellant requested
Additional Collector for acquiring the Subject Land coupled
with a proposal to redevelop the same- Originally, proceedings
1196
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
were initiated before the Additional Collector in the absence
of ICM - Fresh notice was issued to the ICM and it responded
that as owner, it would like to develop the property itself,
under an SR Scheme - Eventually, the CEO submitted report
proposing to acquire the subject land recommending that the
acquisition be undertaken u/s.14 and that though, while ICM
had relayed its willingness to redevelop the Subject Land, it
had not filed any SR Scheme - Notification issued by State
u/s.14(1) for the acquisition of the Subject Land - ICM filed
writ petition, High Court set aside the acquisition inter alia
holding that a landowner has a preferential right to develop
the Subject Land u/ss. 3B(4) and 13(1); SRA was directed to
consider ICM's proposal expeditiously - Whether, in the facts
of the case, the acquisition of the Subject Land by the State
Government was rightly set aside by the High Court:
Held: Impugned judgement upheld - The SRA never issued a
notice to Indian Cork Mills Private Limited-ICM (owner of the
subject land), thereby inviting it to submit an SR Scheme, and
does not appear to have explored the opportunity for the owner
to develop the Subject Land - As such, ICM's preferential right
to develop the land was not extinguished - On facts, it cannot be
concluded that ICM failed to submit its scheme within the stipulated
time -ICM was, at all times, willing to prepare and submit an SR
Scheme, but neither the appellant-housing society nor the SRA
extended the necessary cooperation - Where the circumstances
and the conduct of the SRA and the Society themselves impeded
the owner from submitting the SR Scheme, it cannot be said that
the owner failed to do so within a reasonable period - The SRA
and the State exceeded their power, apparently to pre-empt the
owner from undertaking redevelopment - The acquisition of land,
in such circumstances, being a colourable exercise of power is
unsustainable - The conduct and bona fides of both the SRA and
the appellant are seriously doubtful - The SRA's entire initiative to
undertake Slum Rehabilitation on the Subject Land was driven at
the behest of the appellant - To permit the acquisition to stand,
despite the dubious motives of the appellant and its developer and
the deeply suspect conduct of the SRA, would catalyse a travesty
of justice - Directions issued. [Paras 92-95, 106, 107]
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - Scheme of the Act - Chapters
I-A; IV, V - Original Framework for Slum Redevelopment
(1971) vis-à-vis New Framework for Slum Rehabilitation
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
1197
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
(Between 1995 and 2018) - 2018 Amendment - Subordinate
Legislation/Circulars - Development Control Regulations for
Greater Mumbai, 1991 - Guidelines for the Implementation of
Slum Rehabilitation Policy in Greater Mumbai, 1997 - General
Slum Rehabilitation Scheme for Greater Mumbai, 1998 - SRA
Circular Nos. 144 and 144-A - Enumerated. [Paras 3-38]
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 - Chapter I-A - Scope - Discussed.
Case Law Cited
Murlidhar Teckchand Gandhi and Others v. State of Maharashtra
and Others, Supreme Court of India, Civil Appeal No. 11077 of
2017, judgement dated 29.08.2017 - distinguished.
Atesham Ahmed Khan v. Lakadawala Developers Pvt. Ltd., 2011
SCC OnLine Bom 239; Awdesh Vasistha Tiwari v. Chief Executive
Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority, 2006 SCC OnLine Bom
481 - referred to.
List of Acts
Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971; Maharashtra Regional and Town
Planning Act, 1966; Development Control Regulations for Greater
Mumbai, 1991; Development Control and Promotion Regulations
for Greater Mumbai, 2034; Guidelines for the Implementation of
Slum Rehabilitation Policy in Greater Mumbai, 1997; General Slum
Rehabilitation Scheme for Greater Mumbai, 1998.
List of Keywords
Slum Rehabilitation Area (SR Area); Preferential right of the
landowner to redevelop Slum Rehabilitation Area (SR Area);
Preferential right to redevelop; Landowner be specially notified and
invited to redevelop the SR Area; Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (SR
Scheme); Acquisition of land; Validity of the acquisition of land;
Slum dwellers; Village Tungwa, Taluka Kurla, Mumbai; Greater
Mumbai; Hutment dwellers; Encroachment of land; Slum area;
Slum Rehabilitation Area; Slum Rehabilitation Scheme; Housing
society of slum dwellers; Owner's preferential right; Owner's right
to develop an SR Area; Chapters I-A; IV and V of the Maharashtra
Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act,
1198
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
1971; Redevelopment; Failure to exercise preferential right;
Landowners; Owner's preferential right to develop; Sections 13,
14 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971; Framework for Slum Rehabilitation
poorly structured; Power of State Government to acquire land;
Power of Competent Authority to redevelop clearance area;
Section 3C, Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971; Declaration of a slum rehabilitation area;
Section 3C(1) Declaration; Pre-empt the owner from undertaking
redevelopment; Colourable exercise of power; Proposal for
redevelopment; Acquisition for redevelopment; Land acquisition
proposal; Willingness to develop the Subject Land; Scheme for
redevelopment; Landholders; Occupants; Peremptory right of
redevelopment; Marginalised section of urban society; Third-party
developers; Manipulating inhabitants; Reasonable time; Issuance
of notice-cum-invite to landowner.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 11014 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 13.06.2018 of the High Court
of Judicature at Bombay in WP No. 658 of 2017
With
Civil Appeal No(s). 11015 and 11016 of 2025
Appearances for Parties
Advs. for the Appellant:
Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Sr. Adv., Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi,
Ms. Gautami Yadav, Ms. Damini Vishwakarma, Aaditya Aniruddha
Pande, Arpit Rai, Sudipto Sircar, Aviral Kashyap.
Advs. for the Respondents:
Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Amar Dave,
Shyam Mehta, Sr. Advs., Amol Nirmalkumar Suryawanshi, Ms.
Gautami Yadav, Ms. Srishty Pandey, Sunil Kumar Verma, Aman Raj
Gandhi, Ms. Jasmine Seth, Aryan Srivastava, Parthasarathy Bose,
Ms. Panchi Agarwal, Pranaya Goyal, Ms. Sonali Jaitley Bakhshi,
Jaiyesh Bakhshi, Ravi Tyagi, Mayank Mishra, Ms. Manmilan Sidhu,
Ankit Tyagi, Ms. Sudiksha Saina, Ms. Bhumika Bhatnagar, Shikhar
Misra, P. V. Yogeswaran, Varad Kilor, Siddharth Dharmadhikari,
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
1199
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, Sachin Patil, Siddharth Dharmadhikari,
Abhikalp Pratap Singh, Utkarsh Kumar, Ms. Shubhangi Agarwal,
Aditya Krishna, Arpit Rai, Sudipto Sircar, Aviral Kashyap.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Surya Kant, J.
Leave granted.
2.
The dispute which falls for consideration in these Civil Appeals pertains
to the validity of the acquisition of land bearing CTS Nos. 119 I and
119 I/1-83 in Village Tungwa, Taluka Kurla, Mumbai, admeasuring
9,054 sq. m. (Subject Land), under the Maharashtra Slum Areas
(Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (Slums
Act). The High Court of Judicature at Bombay (High Court), vide
the Impugned Judgements dated 13.06.2018 and 09.07.2018, has:
(i) allowed the writ petition filed by the landowner; (ii) held the
acquisition to be void; and (iii) directed the State of Maharashtra
and the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) to invite the landowner
and consider its proposal for redevelopment. The instant appeals
have, thus, been preferred by the proposed housing society of slum
dwellers, the State of Maharashtra, and the SRA.
A.
LEGISLATIVE SCHEME
3.
Before delving into the facts of this case, it may be prudent to first
consider the legislative scheme of the Slums Act.
4.
The Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 was originally enacted by the Maharashtra
State Legislature as "[an] Act to make better provision for the
improvement and clearance of slum areas in the State and their
redevelopment."
A.1 Original Framework for Slum Redevelopment (1971)
5.
In its original form, the Slums Act provided a procedure for appointment
of a Competent Authority (Section 3); declaration by the Competent
Authority of certain slums as 'Slum Areas' (Chapter II); improvements
to be conducted in such Slum Areas by the landowner or the
Competent Authority (Chapter III); clearing and redevelopment of
1200
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
the Slum Areas (Chapter IV); and the acquisition of land for such
redevelopment (Chapter V).
6.
Given the background of the instant appeals, it seems to us that,
besides the definitions contained in Section 2 of the Slums Act,
Chapters IV and V thereof also merit a more detailed consideration.
7.
Section 2 contains the definitions of various terms and phrases used
in the Slums Act:
"2. Definitions.- In this Act, unless the context otherwise
requires --
[xxxx]
(d) "land" includes building and also benefits to arise
out of land, things attached to the earth or permanently
fastened to anything attached to the earth;
(e) "occupier" includes,-
(i) any person who for the time being is paying
or is liable to pay to the owner the rent or any
portion of the rent of the land or building in
respect of which such rent is paid or is payable;
(ii) an owner in occupation of, or otherwise using,
his land or building;
(iii) a rent-free tenant of any land or building;
(iv) a licensee in occupation of any land or
building; and
(v) any person who is liable to pay to the owner
damages for the use and occupation of any
land or building;
(f) "owner", when used with reference to any building
or land, means the person who receives or is entitled
to receive the rent of the building or land, if the building
or land were let, and includes,-
(i) an agent or trustee who receives such rent
on account of the owner;
(ii) an agent or trustee who receives the rent
of, or is entrusted with, or concerned for, any
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
1201
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
building or land devoted to religious or charitable
purpose;
(iii) a receiver, sequestrator or manager
appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction
to have the charge of or to exercise the rights
of owner of the said building or land; and
(iv) a mortgagee-in-possession;
but does not include, a slumlord;
[xxxx]
(h) "slum clearance" means the clearance of any
slum area by the demolition and removal of buildings
therefrom;
[xxxx] "
8.
It may be noted that although the term 'landholder' is not expressly
defined within the legislation, it is taken to mean all the persons
who hold any interest in the land in question. This would, of course,
include the owner(s) of the land, but it also covers other interest
holders, such as mortgagees or assignees.
9.
Chapter IV lays down the process whereby the Competent Authority
can decide to clear a declared Slum Area, execute such a decision,
and initiate the redevelopment of the area.
10. Section 11(1) allows the Competent Authority to declare a Slum Area
as a Clearance Area, if it is satisfied "that the most satisfactory
method of dealing with the conditions in the area is the demolition
of all the buildings in the area."
11. Following the declaration, Section 12 stipulates how the buildings
and structures on the land would be cleared. A Clearance Order is to
be issued by the Competent Authority, whereafter the occupants are
given a specified time to vacate the buildings. An appeal against the
Clearance Order lies before a Tribunal. Once the Clearance Order
becomes operative, the landowner must demolish the buildings on
its land within six weeks, at its own cost.
12. Within this scheme, sub-section (10) of Section 12 further allows the
owner to redevelop the land after the execution of the Clearance Order,
subject to any laws governing town planning, erection of buildings, and
1202
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
approval of plans as well as any restrictions placed by the Competent
Authority. For reference, we shall quote the following portion of
Section 12:
"12. Clearance Order.-
[xxxx]
(10) Subject to the provisions of this Act, and of any other
law for the time being in force in relation to town-planning
and to the regulation of the erection of buildings, where
a clearance order has become operative, the owner of
the land to which the clearance order applies, may
redevelop the land in accordance with the plans approved
by the Competent Authority, and subject to such restrictions
and conditions (including a condition with regard to the
time within which the redevelopment shall be completed),
if any as that Authority may think fit to impose:
Provided that, an owner who is aggrieved by a restriction
or condition so imposed on the user of his land, or by a
subsequent refusal of the Competent Authority to cancel
or modify any such restriction or condition may, within
such time as may be prescribed, appeal to the Tribunal
and its decision shall be final.
(11) No person shall commence or cause to be
commenced any work in contravention of a plan
approved or a restriction or condition imposed under
sub-section (10)."
[Emphasis supplied]
13. Finally, the Competent Authority is also permitted to redevelop
the Clearance Area at its own cost under Section 13(1). The only
requirements to exercise this power are that the owner must not
have commenced redevelopment work and the Competent Authority
ought to be satisfied that such an action would be necessary in public
interest. Section 13 is reproduced hereinbelow:
"13. Power of Competent Authority to redevelop
clearance area.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in
sub-section (1) of section 12, the Competent Authority may,
at any time after the land has been cleared of buildings in
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
1203
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
accordance with a clearance order, but before the work
of redevelopment of that land has been commenced by
the owner, by order, determine to redevelop the land at its
own cost, if that Authority is satisfied that it is necessary
in the public interest to do so.
(2) Where land has been cleared of the buildings in
accordance with a clearance order, the Competent
Authority, if it is satisfied that the land has been, or is
being, redeveloped by the owner thereof in contravention
of plans duly approved, or any restrictions or conditions
imposed under sub-section (10) of section 12, or has not
been redeveloped within the time, if any, specified under
such conditions, may, by order, determine to redevelop
the land at its own cost:
Provided that, before passing such order, the owner shall
be given a reasonable opportunity of showing cause why
the order should not be passed."
14. To complement the above-mentioned ability of the Competent
Authority to redevelop the Clearance Area, Chapter V introduces
a procedure for the acquisition of land under the Slums Act. While
Section 14 gives power to the State Government to acquire land,
subsequent Sections provide for concomitant processes to take over
possession of the land as well as for computation, apportionment,
and payment or deposit of compensation for the acquisition.
15. For reference, Section 14 is reproduced below:
"14. Power of State Government to acquire land.- (1)
Where on any representation from the Competent Authority
it appears to the State Government that, in order to enable
the Authority to execute any work of improvement or to
redevelop any slum area or any structure in such area, it
is necessary that such area, or any land within adjoining
or surrounded by any such area should be acquired, the
State Government may acquire the land by publishing in
the Official Gazette, a notice to the effect that the State
Government has decided to acquire the land in pursuance
of this section:
Provided that, before publishing such notice, the State
Government, or as the case may be, the Competent
1204
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Authority may call upon by notice the owner of, or any
other person who, in its or his opinion may be interested
in, such land to show cause in writing why the land should
not be acquired with reasons therefor, to the Competent
Authority within the period specified in the notice; and the
Competent Authority shall, with all reasonable despatch,
forward any objections so submitted together with his
report in respect thereof to the State Government and
on considering the report and the objections, if any, the
State Government may pass such order as it deems fit.
(1A) The acquisition of land for any purpose mentioned in
sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be a public purpose.
(2) When a notice as aforesaid is published in the Official
Gazette, the land shall, on and from the date on which
the notice is so published, vest absolutely in the State
Government free from all encumbrances."
16. This above system, holistically, constitutes the original framework for
initiating the redevelopment of slums under the Slums Act, beginning
with declaration of a Slum Area and concluding with either the owner
developing it or the SRA taking over the redevelopment.
A.2 New Framework for Slum Rehabilitation (Between 1995
and 2018)
17. In 1995, the Maharashtra State Legislature amended the Slums
Act to introduce a new framework for Slum Rehabilitation through
Chapter I-A. According to the Statement of Objects and Reasons of
the Amendment, the intention was to establish an authority responsible
for overseeing each aspect of the slum rehabilitation process,
including situations where slum dwellers were not participating. The
phrase 'Slum Rehabilitation Work' has since been defined within
Section 2(h-e) of the Slums Act as "the work relating to demolition
of any structure or any part thereof in slum area or Slum
Rehabilitation Area, and construction of a new building thereon."
This amendment, however, did not tinker with the original legislative
policy existing prior to 1995. Instead, Chapter I-A was incorporated
to act as a separate procedure, applicable to certain areas.
18. Section 3A provides for the appointment of the Slum Rehabilitation
Authority for certain areas to facilitate and regulate the redevelopment
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
1205
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
process. For this purpose, each SRA has a Chief Executive Officer
(CEO). In the context of the area concerned in the instant case, the
SRA for Greater Mumbai has been in place since 1995.
19. Section 3B stipulates the power and duty of the SRA to prepare the
General Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (General SR Scheme) for the
area covered by the SRA. Sub-section (4), which lists the matters
which the General SR Scheme would provide for, is reproduced for
reference:
"3B. Slum Rehabilitation Schemes.-
[xxxx]
(4) The Slum Rehabilitation Scheme so notified under
sub-section (3) shall, generally lay down the parameters
for declaration of any land as the Slum Rehabilitation Area
and indicate the manner in which rehabilitation of the area
declared as Slum Rehabilitation Area shall be carried out.
In particular, it shall provide for all or any of the following
matters, that is to say,-
(a) the parameters or guidelines for declaration of an
area as the slum rehabilitation area;
(b) basic and essential parameters of development of
slum rehabilitation area under the Slum Rehabilitation
Scheme;
(c) provision for obligatory participation of the
landholders and occupants of the area declared
as the slum rehabilitation area under the Slum
Rehabilitation Scheme in the implementation of
the Scheme;
(d) provision relating to transit accommodation pending
development of the slum rehabilitation area and
allotment of tenements on development to the
occupants of such area, free of cost.
(e) scheme for development of the Slum Rehabilitation
Areas under the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme by
the landholders and occupants by themselves
or through a developer and the terms and
conditions of such development; and the option
1206
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
available to the Slum Rehabilitation Authority
for taking up such development in the event of
non-participation of the landholders or occupants;
(f)
provision regarding sanction of Floor Space Index
and transfer of development rights, if any, to be made
available to the developer for development of the
slum rehabilitation area under the Slum Rehabilitation
Scheme;
(g) provision regarding non-transferable nature of
tenements for a certain period, etc.
[xxxx] "
[Emphasis supplied]
20. Section 3C, reproduced hereinafter, provides for the declaration of an
area as a Slum Rehabilitation Area (SR Area). After the publication
of the General SR Scheme, the CEO can declare any area as an
SR Area, if it meets the criteria specified in the said Scheme. Such
a declaration (Section 3C(1) Declaration) would be published in
the Official Gazette, and an appeal against it lies before the Special
Tribunal.
"3C. Declaration of a slum rehabilitation area.-
(1) As soon as may be, after the publication of the Slum
Rehabilitation Scheme, the Chief Executive Officer on being
satisfied circumstances in respect of any area, justifying
its declaration as slum rehabilitation area under the said
scheme, may by an order published in the Official Gazette,
declare such area to be a "slum rehabilitation area". The
order declaring slum rehabilitation area (hereinafter referred
to as "the slum rehabilitation order") shall also be given
wide publicity in such manner as may be specified by the
Slum Rehabilitation Authority.
(2) Any person aggrieved by the slum rehabilitation order
may, within four weeks of the publication of such order
prefer an appeal to the Special Tribunal; and the decision
of the Special Tribunal shall be final.
(3) On the completion of the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme,
the Slum Rehabilitation Area shall cease to be such area."
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
1207
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
21. Section 3D contains the provisions for the application of other
Chapters of the Slums Act to an area declared as an SR Area.
Section 3D(a) stipulates that Chapters II (regarding declaration of
Slum Areas) and III (regarding improvements in Slum Areas) would
not apply to an SR Area.
22. Section 3D(b) clarifies that Chapter IV (regarding clearance and
redevelopment) applies to SR Areas. As per sub-clause (i), Section 11
(regarding declaration as Clearance Area) is not applicable to an SR
Area. As such, once an area is declared to be an SR Area, it cannot
then be declared as a Clearance Area.
23. Section 3D(b)(ii) provides that Section 12 of the Slums Act is applicable
with certain modifications. Effectively, the CEO is empowered to
issue a Clearance Order under Section 12 in respect of SR Areas.
It is pertinent that the modification virtually retains sub-section (10),
wherein, as already elucidated, the private owner of the SR Area has
the right to redevelop it after the Clearance Order comes into force.1
24. Section 3D(b)(iii), then, effectively substitutes Section 13 and
introduces a new framework which replaces the original scheme.
Under this new provision, the SRA can decide to undertake
rehabilitation of the slum itself after the area is declared an SR Area.
25. Section 3D(c) deals with the applicability of Chapter V (regarding the
acquisition of land). Generally, the acquisition powers under Chapter
V are made applicable to SR Areas with certain modifications. These
modifications place the CEO as a substitute for the Competent
Authority. Specifically, a modification is also made to the first part of
Section 14 to clarify when the acquisition can be undertaken.
26. The remaining provisions in Section 3D address other aspects of
implementing the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme (SR Scheme) and
ensuring the rehabilitation of slum dwellers.
27. At this juncture, it is essential to reproduce the relevant portions of
Section 3D:
"3D. Application of other Chapters of this Act to slum
Rehabilitation Area with modification.- On publication
of the slum Rehabilitation Scheme under sub-section (1)
of Section 3B, the provisions of other Chapters of this Act
1
Reproduced in Paragraph 12.
1208
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
shall apply to any area declared as the slum rehabilitation
area, subject to the following modifications, namely:-
[xxxx]
(b) in Chapter IV,-
[xxxx]
(ii) in Section 12,-
[xxxx]
(H) in sub-section (10),-
(a) for the words "Competent Authority",
the words "Slum Rehabilitation
Authority" shall be substituted;
(b) in the proviso,-
(i) for the words "Competent
Authority", the words "Chief
Executive Officer" shall be
substituted;
(ii) for the words "Tribunal", the
words "Special Tribunal" shall
be substituted;
(iii) for Section 13, the following Section shall
be substituted, namely:-
"13. Power of Slum Rehabilitation Authority
to develop Slum Rehabilitation Area.- (1)
Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (10) of section 12, the Slum Rehabilitation
authority may, after any area is declared as the
Slum Rehabilitation Area, if the landholders or
occupants of such area do not come forward
within a reasonable time, with a scheme for
redevelopment of such land, by order, determine
to redevelop such land by entrusting it to any
agency for the purpose.
(2) Where on declaration of any area as a Slum
Rehabilitation Area the Slum Rehabilitation
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
1209
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
Authority , is satisfied that the land in the
Slum Rehabilitation Area has been or is being
developed by the owner in contravention of
the plan duly approved, or any restrictions of
conditions imposed under sub-section (10) of
section 12, or has not been developed within
the time, if any, specified under such conditions
it may, by order, determine to develop the land
by entrusting it to any agency for the purpose:
Provided that, before passing such the owner
shall be given a reasonable opportunity of cause
why such order should not be passed.";
(c) in Chapter V,-
(i) in Section 14, in sub-section (1),-
(A) for the portion beginning with the
words "Where on any representation" and
ending with the words "clearance area"
the following portion shall be substituted,
namely:-
"Where on any representation from the
Chief Executive Officer it appears to
the State Government that, in order to
enable the Slum Rehabilitation Authority
to carry out development under the
Slum Rehabilitation Scheme in any Slum
Rehabilitation Area"
(B) after the proviso, the following proviso
shall be added, namely:-
"Provided further that, the State Government
may delegate its powers under this
sub-section to any officer not below the
rank of Commissioner."
[xxxx] "
28. The text of Section 14, as contained in Chapter V in the original
legislative scheme, has already been reproduced in Paragraph 15
above. However, as previously noticed, for the purpose of giving effect
1210
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
to the new scheme envisaged in Chapter I-A, the said Section 14,
especially sub-section (1) thereof, has been partially amended through
Section 3D and reads as follows:
"14. Power of State Government to acquire land.- (1)
Where on any representation from the Chief Executive
Officer it appears to the State Government that, in order
to enable the Slum Rehabilitation Authority to carry out
development under the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme in
any Slum Rehabilitation Area it is necessary that such
area, or any land within adjoining or surrounded by any
such area should be acquired, the State Government may
acquire the land by publishing in the Official Gazette, a
notice to the effect that the State Government has decided
to acquire the land in pursuance of this section:
Provided that, before publishing such notice, the State
Government, or as the case may be, the Competent
Authority may call upon by notice the owner of, or any
other person who, in its or his opinion may be interested
in, such land to show cause in writing why the land should
not be acquired with reasons therefor, to the Competent
Authority within the period specified in the notice; and the
Competent Authority shall, with all reasonable despatch,
forward any objections so submitted together with his
report in respect thereof to the State Government and
on considering the report and the objections, if any, the
State Government may pass such order as it deems fit.
Provided further that, the State Government may delegate
its powers under this sub-section to any officer not below
the rank of Commissioner.
[xxxx] "
[Emphasis supplied]
29. The subsequent provisions of Chapter I-A lay down the administrative
aspects of the SRA's functioning.
30. Since the instant case pertains to an SR Area under Chapter I-A,
it is clarified that wherever the provisions of Chapters IV and V are
referred to, the reference remains to the modified provisions as they
are now encapsulated in Section 3D. However, wherever need be,
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
1211
Tarabai Nagar Co-Op. Hog. Society (Proposed) v.
The State of Maharashtra and Others
the original provisions of Chapters IV and V will be referred to with
the phrase 'original framework'.
A.3 The 2018 Amendment
31. The Slums Act was further amended in 2018, with substantial changes
made to the expressions and language of certain provisions, reflecting
the revised legislative policy.
32. However, considering that the actions impugned before the High
Court took place before the amended Act came into force on
26.04.2018, there is no gainsaying that the instant case would have
to be adjudicated in accordance with the law as it stood when the
acquisition was initiated.
33. We are pained to observe that the Slums Act, especially the framework
for Slum Rehabilitation, is poorly structured. There appears to be no
cogent reason as to why, instead of enacting a self-contained code
within Section I-A, the drafters of this legislation chose to incorporate
an entirely distinct slum rehabilitation mechanism by amending the
existing legislation through Section 3D. This approach to drafting
inevitably blurs the boundaries between the two frameworks, creating
confusion in the mind of a reader. In this backdrop, dealing with the
2018 Amendment at this stage would only exacerbate the perplexity.
We thus do not deem it necessary to refer to or reproduce the 2018
Amendment.
A.4 Subordinate Legislation and other Circulars
34. It is also imperative to note that the Slums Act is supplemented
by critical subordinate legislation/circulars to enable its proper
implementation. Keeping in view the discussion above, consideration
would be limited to the subordinate legislation/circulars applicable
at the time of initiation of the acquisition. The same are noticed
herein below.
A.4.1 Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai,
1991
35. The development of urban areas in Maharashtra is governed by
the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. Under
this Act, the State Government notified the Development Control
Regulations for Greater Mumbai, 1991 (DCR 1991). It creates a
regulatory framework for any development work to be carried out within
1212
[2025] 8 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
Greater Mumbai. Regulation 33(10) was introduced to cover plans
to redevelop slums. This Regulation predates the new framework
under Chapter I-A of the Slums Act and is thus applicable in cases
of development of Slum Areas as well as SR Areas. It provides a
comprehensive scheme of requirements and approvals, along with
development incentives, such as additional transferable Floor Space
Index (FSI). Although the DCR 1991 has been replaced in 2020 by
the Development Control and Promotion Regulations for Greater
Mumbai, 2034 (DCPR 2034), Regulation 33(10) retains its position
and remains substantially unchanged.
A.4.2 Guidelines for the Implementation of Slum Rehabilitation
Policy in Greater Mumbai, 1997
36. The SRA issued the Guidelines for the Implementation of Slum
Rehabilitation Policy in Greater Mumbai, 1997 (1997 Guidelines),
to clarify the procedure for slum rehabilitation. Clause IV of the
1997 Guidelines outlines the procedure for submitting, processing,
and approving SR Schemes. In Paragraph 8 thereof, it is provided
that redevelopment plans are to be prepared in accordance with
Regulation 33(10) of the DCR 1991. Furthermore, it lays out the
various Annexures which are to be duly filled and submitted along
with the proposal.