Court directs State Government to constitute Expert Committee for comprehensive review and reform of slum redevelopment laws amid mounting litigation and persistent urban housing challenges.
In a landmark judgment delivered on May 8, 2026, the Bombay High Court, acting on its own motion and in compliance with the Supreme Court’s directives in Yash Developers v. Harihar Krupa Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. (2024), has mandated a performance audit of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (Slum Act). The judgment highlights deep-rooted inefficiencies, systemic failures, and governance challenges that have impeded the eradication of slums in Mumbai and other cities despite decades of legislative efforts.
The Court observed that over 55 years after the enactment of the Slum Act, the dream of slum-free cities remains largely unfulfilled. The sprawling slums continue to pose severe public health, safety, and social challenges, exacerbated by unauthorized encroachments on both public and private lands, inadequate rehabilitation, and a flawed redevelopment process dominated by vested interests.
Key findings include the absence of a robust policy to prevent encroachments, the problem of vertical slums with overcrowded rehabilitation buildings lacking adequate light, ventilation, and amenities, and the lack of a scientific, phased approach to slum clearance and redevelopment. The Court underscored the problematic role of slum societies in appointing developers, often manipulated by builders who control redevelopment schemes, sidelining genuine participation by slum dwellers.
The Court also drew attention to the precarious situation of private landowners, who frequently face compulsory acquisition without reasonable opportunity to exercise their preferential right to redevelop their own property. It emphasized the need for strict adherence to statutory timelines and procedural fairness in acquisition and redevelopment processes to safeguard constitutional property rights.
The judgment further criticized the ineffective statutory grievance redressal mechanism, noting the backlog and irregular sittings of the Apex Grievance Redressal Committee (AGRC) and Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC), and recommended inclusion of retired judicial officers to enhance their efficiency and legal rigor.
In a comprehensive directive, the Court ordered the State Government to constitute an Expert Committee within four weeks, comprising town planning experts, municipal representatives, architects, senior bureaucrats, and public representatives. The committee is tasked with conducting a detailed performance audit of the Slum Act, examining issues such as slum land identification, eligibility criteria for slum dwellers, developer selection, land apportionment, transit accommodation, and enforcement mechanisms. The committee is expected to submit its report within ten months, enabling the Government to undertake necessary legislative and administrative reforms.
The Court expressed grave concern over the tacit encouragement of encroachments on valuable public lands and warned against policies that reward illegality by granting free or subsidized housing to encroachers, which contravenes constitutional principles and the public trust doctrine. It emphasized the urgent need to demarcate public lands, prevent further encroachments, and create a substantial pool of public housing accessible on a compensatory or rental basis rather than free allotments.
The judgment also highlighted the significance of maintaining town planning reservations, open spaces, and infrastructure standards in slum redevelopment projects, including adherence to the National Building Code and fire safety norms, to avoid creating congested and hazardous “vertical slums.”
It was noted that financing arrangements involving developers and financial institutions require stringent regulation to prevent misuse of funds and stalled projects that harm slum dwellers and public interest alike.
While acknowledging the efforts made by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) and the State in digitizing surveys, automating beneficiary lists, and introducing amnesty schemes for stalled projects, the Court underscored the persistent challenges that necessitate a fundamental overhaul of the slum redevelopment framework.
In conclusion, the Court emphasized that the task is formidable but achievable with committed political will, administrative accountability, and a scientific, people-centric approach to urban housing. The judgment called for a specialized corporation or body dedicated to slum redevelopment to supplement existing authorities and ensure timely, equitable, and quality housing solutions for slum dwellers.
The Court expressed gratitude to the learned Amici Curiae, senior advocates, NGOs, landowners, developers, and government representatives who participated in the proceedings, recognizing this as a unique and significant exercise in judicial facilitation of legislative and policy reforms.
Bottom Line:
Performance audit of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance, and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, ordered to address inefficiencies in slum redevelopment, ensuring improved living conditions for slum dwellers and achieving the goal of slum-free cities.
Statutory provision(s): Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, Sections 3A to 3W, 4, 13, 14, 15A, 17, 22, 33, 34A, 34B, 35, 38, 42, 47, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Development Control Regulations 1991 and 2034, Maharashtra Slum Improvement Board Act, 1973, Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Protection of Tenants in Slum Areas from Eviction Rules, 1972.
High Court On Its Own Motion v. State of Maharashtra, (Bombay)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2894907
