Justice Shahrukh Kathawalla upheld the housing board’s order to initiate eviction against 19 families who had refused to vacate their flats to pave the way for the project.
“The object of redevelopment of old and dilapidated buildings will never be achieved if such withdrawals are taken cognizance of,’’ the judge said. “Permitting such withdrawals will also encourage members of societies to use it as a weapon to blackmail developers.”
The Kher Nagar Colony and Kala Nagar were developed in the ’60s and ’70s as affordable housing projects by Mhada. Initially given on tenancy, ownership of the flats were given to residents in the ’80s. Many of the buildings have now gone for redevelopment.
The controversy before the court was of Ganesh Krupa Housing Society with 54 flats. Rules say the consent of 70% of owners is needed for a redevelopment proposal. Forty five families (83% of the members of the society) gave their consent in 2003, following which approvals were given by the BMC and Mhada.
The matter then went to courts and, subsequently, four years later in 2007, 10 members of the society withdrew their consent letters. By this time, 34 flat owners had vacated their tenements. The opposing group, which now claimed the support of 19 members, sought cancellation of the redevelopment scheme, saying it did not have the consent of 70%.
The court rejected the argument as “devoid of merit’’, saying the petitioners had neither challenged the resolution passed by the society and agreement with the builder nor had they initiated proceedings for cancelling the consent.
“The belated withdrawal of consent by some members is inconsequential,’’ said the judge.
The petitioners had also challenged the jurisdiction of the Mumbai Housing Area Development Board to initiate eviction proceedings under Section 95A of the Mhada Act.
Assistant government pleader G W Mattos, counsel for the housing board, argued that Section 33(5) was applicable to a Mhada layout like Kher Nagar Colony. Consequently, the housing body could initiate eviction proceedings according to rules.
The court agreed and dismissed the petition. The 19 families then requested the court for a stay on eviction for two weeks. The court granted the stay subject to the families furnishing an undertaking that, by February 9, they would not sell or create third-party rights in the flats.