If Slum Act Is A Welfare Legislation, The Welfare Is Not That Of Builders’: Bombay HC Pulls Up SRA & AGRC

Two petitions were filed regarding eviction notices given to slum dwellers within a short timeframe. Slum dwellers had been living in the area for 18-20 years and were suddenly asked to vacate due to redevelopment plans.

A Division Bench of Justice G.S. Patel and Justice Kamal Khata said, “It is an upsetting day for the High Court when we find it necessary to remind statutory authorities, including the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (“SRA”) and the Apex Grievance Redressal Committee (“AGRC”), that if the Slum Act is a welfare legislation, the welfare is not that of builders. We also express our extreme displeasure at the manner in which the AGRC is conducting and discharging — or more accurately not conducting nor discharging — its required functions.”

Advocate Vidryan S Daware appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Yogesh Patil appeared for the Respondent.

The Court criticized the SRA for giving only seven days for eviction and emphasized the human impact of such actions. The Court added, “What we fail to understand is how the SRA, which is charged with looking after the welfare of the slum dwellers, can possibly decide after 18 or 20 year gap that seven days is enough to uproot entire families and households. These are human beings. They have families. They have not pieces on some chess board that can be moved around or even swept of the board.”

The Court issued a directive that eviction notices must specify a date, not just hours, and cannot fall on weekends when courts are closed. The Court said, “A specific date must be mentioned and that date cannot be over a weekend when Courts are unavailable to the affected persons. Justice under our Constitution must mean the right to expect fair treatment from an administrative authority; and, if not, the right to approach a court for redressal. Justice cannot be an empty promise.”

The AGRC's unavailability during the weekend was questioned, contrasting with the court's availability for urgent matters. The Court said, “If the High Court can assemble at short notice to hear a matter like this, we demand an explanation as to how the AGRC can say it is unavailable”

The Court demanded immediate action from the AGRC and threatened consequences for non-compliance. The AGRC was instructed to hold a hearing via video conferencing and ensure availability for emergencies. The Court said, “The AGRC will meet today at 5.00 pm. It will take up both appeals at least for the limited purpose of granting a stay. We expect a signed order to be made available to us at 10.30 am tomorrow, 22nd February 2024. If this is not done, we will proceed against every member of the AGRC. In future we expect the AGRC to be alive to these issues and to be available just as we are whenever there is emergency of this kind.”

The Court ordered the maintenance of the status quo until further notice and demanded alternative rental premises for affected slum dwellers.

Cause Title: Jijaba Dashrath Shinde v. The State of Maharashtra

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates Vidryan S Daware, Akhil Kupade, Prerna Pagare, Archana Gaikwad

Respondents: Advocates Yogesh Patili, Vijay Patil, Mayur Khandeparkar, Shilpa Naik, Himanshi Mishra, Rahul Arora, Akash Gupta, Jeet Gandhi, Dhurti Kapadia, Aparna Vhatkar and Gaurangi Patil.

Click here to read/download Judgment