The Slum Rehabilitation Authority must adhere to its established policies, ensuring that private arrangements do not take precedence: Supreme Court
Case: SAYUNKTA SANGHARSH SAMITI vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Coram: Justices Aniruddha Bose and Sudhanshu Dhulia
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NO.1359 OF 2023
Court Observation: “Thus, SRA has to act in terms of its own policies and circulars without allowing private or contractual interests to prevail over public policy especially a policy which is welfare based,”
“As we can see it is an entirely private arrangement arrived at between the Developer on the one hand and some of the hutment dwellers on the other. SRA has no role to play in it, rather it is an arrangement at the back of SRA and is in defiance of an already existing rehabilitation scheme, statutorily sanctioned, which was surviving.”
“The claim of the appellant was based entirely on the terms of consent arrived between the Developer and them, which has no basis in law.”
“The allotment by draw of lots is not an arbitrary order of SRA but this is the settled procedure, long continuing and in terms of the law.”
“We do not agree with the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellant who only seeks to enforce a private arrangement arrived at between the Developer and the appellant in derogation of the procedure laid down by the SRA.,”
“Considering the conduct of the Developer who has evidently taken a surreptitious route bypassing the statutory procedure, the SRA would be failing in its duty if it does not seek explanation from the Developer in this regard and takes suitable action in accordance with law.”
Previous Posts
Keywords
The Slum Rehabilitation Authority must adhere to its established policies
