New Janta Sra Chs Ltd.Secretary Of Ashok ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through, The High ... on 26 September, 2019
70. Over time, various judgments of this Court, as well as those
of the Supreme Court, have reaffirmed that timely execution is a
core element of any slum rehabilitation project. Judicial
precedents such as Susme Builders (P) Ltd. v. Slum Rehabilitation
Authority, (2018) 2 SCC 230 and New Janta SRA CHS Ltd. v. State
of Maharashtra, 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 3896 have categorically
upheld the principle that delays in implementation of slum
schemes affect a vulnerable population that depends on the
successful and timely completion of such projects for basic
housing. Therefore, SRA's intervention to replace a defaulting or
inefficient developer is legally justified and necessary. The power
conferred by Section 13(2) is not discretionary in the abstract -- it
is a statutory mechanism meant to hold developers accountable
and to avoid indefinite stagnation of rehabilitation schemes. While
Section 13(2) of the Slum Act does not set out an elaborate
procedure to be followed while exercising this power, it is a settled
principle of administrative law that when any authority exercises a
power that affects legal rights or vested interests, it must follow
the principles of natural justice. This includes at minimum: (i)
issuance of a notice to the concerned party, (ii) clear intimation of
the allegations or grounds for proposed action, and (iii) an
opportunity to be heard before any final decision is taken. The
overall scheme of the Slum Act, when read along with the SRA's
internal guidelines, clearly contemplates that a developer facing
proposed removal must be given a fair and meaningful opportunity
52
::: Uploaded on - 25/03/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 25/03/2025 22:39:05 :::
901-wp-2065-2025-F.doc
to respond. These safeguards are in place to ensure that the power
under Section 13(2) is not exercised arbitrarily or unfairly.