In the case involving Adarsh, Saidham, and Maruti against the SRA, a significant ruling was delivered by the Supreme Court of India. This judgment is a crucial step in resolving the ongoing legal battles surrounding the development of land in question. The outcome of this case has far-reaching implications for all stakeholders involved. Stay informed on the latest updates in this intriguing legal saga.
Facts
- The Corporation cancelled Annexure-II due to litigation between the three societies since 2005.
- Adarsh and Saidham submitted Slum Rehabilitation proposals with consent of slum dwellers.
- Maruti filed applications against Adarsh and Saidham’s proposals to the High Power Committee in 2008.
- SRA informed the Corporation to issue Annexure-II to Adarsh, Saidham, and Maruti for their independent plots.
- Maruti later filed for withdrawal of its Additional Affidavit giving consent to the settlement.
- A Local Commissioner confirmed that only 6 out of 172 slum dwellers signed a particular letter in 2018.
- The SRA directed the Corporation to scrutinize the proposals submitted by Adarsh and Saidham.
- Maruti’s proposal was earlier rejected due to bogus and fraudulent documents in 2006.
- Maruti had submitted a rehabilitation scheme proposal in 2005.
- Complaints of fraud in the preparation of Annexure-II were received by the Corporation.
- Affidavits accepting the terms of settlement were filed by Maruti, Adarsh, and Saidham.
- The Corporation also agreed to the terms of settlement proposed by the SRA.
- The High Court initially granted interim relief to the Petitioners by staying the hearing fixed before the Chief Executive Officer of SRA.
- Subsequent Orders allowed the SRA to proceed with the hearing but directed that any decision taken should not be implemented until further Orders from the High Court.
- The SRA rejected the proposals of the Petitioners and instructed that Maruti’s proposal be processed further based on revised Annexure-II.
- Both Writ Petitions filed by the Petitioners were eventually rejected by the High Court on 20 January, 2014.
- During the hearing, it was affirmed through Affidavits that each of the seven plots in question could have independent schemes legally.
- The High Power Committee overturned the SRA’s rejection of Maruti’s proposal, as per an Order dated 7 February, 2009.
- Challenges to the SRA’s orders were made in the Bombay High Court through Writ Petitions filed by Adarsh and Saidham.
- Rule was granted in these petitions on 11 January, 2010, with liberty given to seek relief in case of adverse actions.
- A draft Annexure-II in favor of Maruti was published by the Corporation, leading to a hearing being set by the SRA for cancellation of the Petitioners’ proposal on 23 May, 2011.
- The Petitioners then approached the High Court through Notices of Motion.
- The sequence of events in the case highlights the ongoing legal battles and decisions surrounding the proposals and schemes related to the plots in question.
Also Read: Urs Family Property Dispute: Supreme Court Decree
Decision
- If all three societies are permitted to be developed independently, no prejudice would be caused to any of the slum dwellers.
- The settlement between the parties, accepted by all stakeholders, is fair and reasonable and in the interest of the slum dwellers of all three societies.
- I.A. No 11905/2019 is rejected.
- I.A. No 97692/2018 is allowed.
Also Read: Promissory Estoppel and Public Interest: Union of India vs. M/s Dharampal Satyapal Ltd.
Case Title: ADARSH ESTTE SAHAKARI GRIHA NIRMAN SANSTHA MASRYADIT(PROPOSED) PROMOTER MR.KRISHAN D. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Case Number: SLP(C) No.-006070-006070 / 2014
