Bombay HC Questions Inclusion of Mahalaxmi Dhobighat Drying Land in SRA Scheme
The Bombay High Court has questioned how a 170-year-old Dhobighat drying area at Mahalaxmi in Mumbai, traditionally used by hundreds of washermen, came to be included in a slum redevelopment project, warning that valuable municipal land cannot be diverted without following due process.
A bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Neela Gokhale on August 18 sought detailed explanations from the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), and the developer over the decision to include the open plot in the project.
The petitioners stated that the land has been used since 1851 by 'Rassiholders' for drying clothes, with around 720 Rassiholders historically recognised. They submitted that the land was never occupied by slum structures and was instead an open municipal plot forming part of the heritage Dhobighat precinct.
The land has been incorporated into a slum redevelopment scheme being implemented by Resonant Realtors Projects Pvt Ltd, formerly known as Omkar Realtors and Developers Pvt Ltd, for Sai Baba Nagar Co-operative Housing Society.
The petitioners claimed that the non-slum plot measures 7,724.61 square metres and that its Floor Space Index (FSI) is being utilised for the redevelopment of a slum area nearly five times larger. They added that the Rassiholders were being offered only mechanised drying machines after the completion of the project, rather than standard rehabilitation benefits.
The bench observed that the situation was not only peculiar but alarming, noting that the rights of persons using the Dhobighat area since 1851 had substantially crystallized. The court also noted that the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 recognises community economic activity areas, including drying areas and traditional livelihood facilities.
Stating that valuable public lands cannot simply be cast out from the BMC's land pool and used for a forced redevelopment scheme, the bench directed the Additional Municipal Commissioner to file an affidavit explaining the entire decision-making process. The affidavit must be approved by the Municipal Commissioner.
The developer and the SRA have also been directed to explain how the non-slum drying area was included and how its FSI was approved. The High Court has scheduled the next hearing for September 1.
