Bombay HC Dismisses Fresh Plea Against Allotment Of Salt Pan Lands For Rehab Of Dharavi PAPs
· Free Press Journal
Mumbai, Feb 27: The Bombay High Court on Friday dismissed a fresh public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the allotment of salt pan lands for rehabilitation of project-affected persons (PAPs) under the Dharavi redevelopment project, holding that a third party unconnected with the tender process cannot mount a new challenge under the guise of a PIL.
Court questions maintainability of plea
Visit asg-reflektory.pl for more information.
A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad rejected the plea filed by senior citizen and technical consultant Vasant Pailwan, observing that a petitioner cannot maintain a writ petition by merely adding new prayers or attempting to introduce fresh challenges.
“By adding a new prayer or attempting to make out a new case by throwing a new challenge, the petitioner cannot maintain this writ petition in the garb of a PIL,” the bench said.
Decisions challenged in petition
The petition challenged multiple decisions linked to the redevelopment project, including the October 1, 2022 tender notice, Letters of Approval, development agreements executed in July 2024 and February 2025, as well as the Government Resolution dated July 13, 2023 awarding the project to Adani Properties as the lead partner and the subsequent work order issued on July 17, 2023.
According to the plea, the state government illegally allotted 8.5 acres of Mother Dairy land at Kurla in violation of a 2014 High Court judgment. It further alleged that post facto approval was granted for inclusion of salt pan lands — 255.9 acres and 120.5 acres at Kanjurmarg, 76.5 acres at Bhandup and 65 acres at Mulund — contrary to judicial directions.
Arguments by petitioner
Advocate Kirti G. Munshi, appearing for the petitioner, clarified that there was no objection to redevelopment of Dharavi but opposed the allotment of Mother Dairy and salt pan lands, alleging that valuable government land had been transferred at throwaway prices, causing loss to the public exchequer.
“The land has been handed over at merely 25% of the ready reckoner rate,” Munshi submitted, arguing that the state’s decision violated the public trust doctrine and lacked transparency or policy justification.
State defends redevelopment decision
Opposing the plea, Advocate General Milind Sathe said bidders were informed from the outset about the possibility of acquiring additional land for rehabilitation.
He emphasised that the redevelopment had been declared a project of “vital public importance” and that additional land was required to rehabilitate nearly four lakh ineligible occupants as well.
“It was decided to rehabilitate everyone; otherwise eviction proceedings against four lakh people would have stalled the project altogether,” Sathe said.
Adani Group’s submissions
Senior counsel Vikram Nankani, appearing for the Adani Group, submitted that the tender itself contemplated acquisition of additional land for rehabilitation purposes.
He added that the salt pan lands were transferred from the Central Government to the State Government and not to any private developer. “I have paid a 25% premium so that the land remains with the government,” Nankani said.
Court cites Supreme Court observations
Noting that the petition primarily questioned the legality of the 2022 tender notice, the court observed that the tender contained specific clauses permitting acquisition of private and government land for rehabilitation.
The bench held that the allegations lacked factual foundation and referred to a Supreme Court judgment highlighting a growing trend across High Courts where almost all tenders are challenged on one ground or another, “by a failed tenderer or at his instance or for some oblique purposes.”
Also Watch:
Maharashtra Govt Hands Over 118-Acre Malad Land To Dharavi Redevelopment Project For Rehab HousingPIL dismissed
The court underscored that the petitioner, having not participated in the tender process, could not be permitted to raise a second challenge through a PIL.
“A concluded contract cannot be examined by a writ court merely on the ground that certain issues were not raised earlier or could have been argued better,” the bench said while dismissing the petition.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/