The Supreme Court has issued a directive for the Bombay High Court to perform a performance audit of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act of 1971. This decision comes in response to over 1,600 pending cases in the high court, indicating significant challenges in the implementation of this welfare legislation aimed at aiding the impoverished.
The order, delivered by a bench consisting of Justices PS Narasimha and Aravind Kumar, mandates the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court to establish a bench for initiating suo motu proceedings to critically examine the Act’s effectiveness and pinpoint the obstacles hindering its application. The justices highlighted the constitutional duty of the Executive to not only implement but also continuously monitor and assess the impact of such statutes to ensure they fulfill their intended purpose.
This judicial action arose from a dismissal of an appeal by ‘Yash Developers’ against a high court verdict that upheld the cancellation of a slum-redevelopment project in Borivali, Mumbai. The project, initially approved in 2003, faced over two decades of delays, leading to its eventual termination by the Apex Grievance Redressal Committee in 2021.
In their 43-page judgment, Justice Narasimha expressed agreement with the high court’s frustration regarding the Act’s application, pointing out the “problematic” statutory scheme that often leads to extensive litigation. According to data from the National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG), there are currently 1,612 cases under this Act pending in the high court, with 135 of them being over a decade old.
The Supreme Court underscored the need for a thorough review of the statute, noting issues such as the problematic identification and declaration of land as a slum and the convoluted process of identifying legitimate slum dwellers. These factors contribute to doubts about the independence and integrity of the decision-making process, often influenced by builders and other stakeholders.
Also Read
The judgment emphasized that the ongoing issues with the statutory framework necessitate a reassessment to ensure the Act can effectively provide basic housing and uphold the dignity of individuals, aligning with constitutional guarantees.
