― Advertisement ―

JOB OPPORTUNITY AT S.K FINANCE LTD.

About the CompanyS.K Finance Ltd. is a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC) engaged in vehicle finance, MSME lending, and recovery operations, offering roles in...
HomeDharavi Koli Jamat Trust vs State Of Maharashtra Th. The Chief ......

Dharavi Koli Jamat Trust vs State Of Maharashtra Th. The Chief … on 18 April, 2026

ADVERTISEMENT

Bombay High Court

Dharavi Koli Jamat Trust vs State Of Maharashtra Th. The Chief … on 18 April, 2026

Author: M. S. Karnik

Bench: M. S. Karnik, S. M. Modak

2026:BHC-OS:9754-DB


                Bhogale                                             wpl-12541-2026.odt



                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                               WRIT PETITION (L) NO.12541 OF 2026
              Dharavi Koli Jamat Trust
              Registration No.E-6074/1975 (Mumbai)
              Having its office at Holi Maidan,
              Dharavi Koliwada, Mumbai-400 017             ... Petitioner

                      Versus

              1. State of Maharashtra
                 (Through the Chief Secretary)
                 Mantralaya, Madame Cama Road,
                 Mumbai - 400 032
                 [Respondent No.1 to be served through
                 through Government Pleader (OS)
                 High Court at Bombay, Mumbai]

              2. Dharavi Redevelopment Project,
                 Slum Rehabilitation Authority
                 Gala Altezza, Udyog Nagar, E,
                 Plot No.17-A, Flank Rd, next to Sri
                 Shanmukhananda Chandrasekarendra
                 Saraswathi Auditorium, Sion,
                 Mumbai - 400 022

              3. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
                 Mahapalika Head Office, Mahapalika
                 Marg, Fort, Mumbai - 400 001

              4. M/s. Navbharat Mega Developers
                 Private Limited
                 having its Registered Office at 601,
                 Hallmark Business Plaza, Opp. Guru
                 Nanak Hospital, Bandra (East),
                 Mumbai - 400 051                          .... Respondents

                                              ****

                                             1
  Bhogale                                                         wpl-12541-2026.odt



Mr. Ravi R. Gadagkar i/b. Adv. Usha R. Gadagkar, for the
petitioner.
Mr. Milind More, Addl.G.P., for respondent No.1-State.
Adv. Ravleen Sabharwal a/w Adv. Aarushi Yadav, for respondent
No.2.
Adv. Anjali Ghuge a/w Adv. Vaishali Ugale, for respondent No.3-
BMC/MCGM.
Mr. Ravindra Kadam, Senior Advocate a/w Adv. Rati Patni, Adv.
Vikrant Dere i/b. Wadia Ghandy & Co., for respondent No.4.
                             ****
                            CORAM : M. S. KARNIK &
                                        S. M. MODAK, JJ.

                                     DATE :      18th APRIL, 2026

JUDGMENT (PER M. S. KARNIK, J.) :

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India seeks the following substantive reliefs :-

SPONSORED

“(b) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to exercise the
jurisdiction vested under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or writ in the
nature of Certiorari or any other writ order or directions to the
Respondent Nos.1 to 3 to produce the all the records, files,
papers and documents in respect of determination,
demarcation and finalisation of the outer boundaries of
Dharavi Koliwada and after going through the validity, legality
and correctness thereof hold and declare there has been
inordinate delay and failure on the part of officials/authorities
of the Urban Development, City Survey, Revenue & Forest and
Fisheries Departments of Respondent No.1 and Respondent
Nos.2 and 3 in discharging their official duty to demarcate and
finalise of the outer boundaries of Dharavi Koliwada;

2

 Bhogale                                                        wpl-12541-2026.odt



          (c)       that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to exercise the

Jurisdiction vested in under Article 26 of the Constitution of
India and be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or writ in
the nature of Mandamus or any other writ order or directions
to the concerned officials/authorities of Respondent Nos.1 to 3
to determine, demarcate and finalise of the outer boundaries
of Dharavi Koliwada expeditiously;

(d) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to exercise the
jurisdiction vested in under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or writ in
the nature of Mandamus or any other writ order or directions
to the concerned officials/authorities of Respondent Nos.1 to 3
to direct Respondent No.4 restrict implementation of the
Dharavi Redevelopment Project only to the extent the area of
which Plans of which are approved and sanctioned by the
Notification dated 3rd March, 2016;

(e) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to exercise the
jurisdiction vested in under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or writ in
the nature of Mandamus or any other writ order or directions
to direct concerned officials/authorities of Respondent Nos.1
to 3 not to allow Respondent No.4 to implement the Dharavi
Redevelopment Project on any part of the 2,00,830 square
meters of land/area inspected and measured on 15th
November, 2018, by concerned officials of the Fisheries and
City Land Survey Departments of Respondent No.1, as forming
Dharavi Koliwada;

(f) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to exercise the
jurisdiction vested in under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and be pleased to hold and declare that Respondent
No.4 is not entitled to implement the Dharavi Redevelopment
Project on any part of the 2,00,830 square meters of land/area
(Exhibit- “F-1”) inspected and measured on 15 th November,
2018, by the concerned officials of the Fisheries and City Land
Survey Departments of Respondent No.1, as forming Dharavi

3
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

Koliwada;

(g) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to exercise the
jurisdiction vested in under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and be pleased to hold and declare that the action of
Respondent No.4 implementing Dharavi Rehabilitation Project
of any part of the 2,00,830 square meters of land/area
(Exhibit- “F-1”) inspected and measured on 15 th November,
2018, by the concerned officials of the Fisheries and City Land
Survey Departments of Respondent No.1, as forming Dharavi
Koliwada, is illegal, invalid, bad-in-law and ab initio void and
violates Regulation 33(16) of DCPR-2034;

(h) that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to exercise the
jurisdiction vested in under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India and be pleased to direct Respondent No.4 to forthwith
remove all the barricades and corrugated tin sheets erected on
lands, buildings and structures by Respondent No.4 on all such
parts of the 2,00,830 square meters of land/area (Exhibit-

“F-1″).”

2. The facts of the case are stated hereafter. The petitioner,

the Dharavi Koli Jamat Trust is a Public Trust of fisherfolk of

Dharavi registered under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950.

The respondent No.2 is the Dharavi Redevelopment Project

(“DRP”, for short) being implemented by the Slum Rehabilitation

Authority (“SRA”, for short), an authority constituted under the

Maharashtra Slum (Clearance, Improvement and Rehabilitation),

Act, 1971 (“Slum Act“, for short). Respondent No.4 is a private

limited company constituted under the Companies Act, 2013, a

4
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) constituted and formed for the

redevelopment and implementation of DRP.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is inaction

and inordinate delay of about 15 years on the part of the

concerned authorities of the Revenue and Forest Department and

the Urban Development Department of the State of Maharashtra in

ascertaining, determining, demarcating and finalising the outer

boundary of Dharavi Koliwada. The petitioner wants this area to

be excluded from the DRP and incorporate such excluded area as

Koliwada in the Development Plan for Greater Mumbai-2034. The

petitioner says that there has been illegal handing over of the

lands and buildings/structures standing thereon in the Dharavi

Koliwada by the allottee/s housing societies of employees of

Government Railway Police (GRP), Mahanagar Telephone Nigam

Limited (MTNL), Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC),

Bombay Electric Supply and Transport (BEST), Oil and Natural

Gas Corporation Ltd. (ONGC) and M/s. Adani Electricity Mumbai

Limited (AEML) (“Buildings”, for short) to Respondent No.4. It is

the case of the petitioner that the Respondent No.4, in an

5
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

arbitrary, high-handed, unauthorized and illegal manner, is taking

possession of such lands/buildings/structures in Dharavi Koliwada,

further barricading and erecting corrugated tin sheets without the

concerned authorities first ascertaining, determining and

demarcating the boundary of Dharavi Koliwada to exclude such

area of Dharavi Koliwada from the DRP and to incorporate the

same in the Development Plan-2034 as Koliwada.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner-Trust was formed by the local fisherfolk (Kolis) of

Dharavi for the welfare of its members who have been

continuously engaged in fishing and allied activities. It is

submitted that the fisherfolk have been holding/celebrating social,

cultural and religious functions/events in Dharavi Koliwada for

several centuries even prior to the enactment of the Bombay

Municipal Corporation Act, the Maharashtra Regional and Town

Planning Act (“MRTP Act”, for short) and the Slum Act. The Kolis

for centuries have predominantly depended upon and continue to

depend upon fishing as their source of livelihood.

6

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Dharavi

Koliwada amongst other Koliwadas, i.e. Colaba, Girgaon, Sewri,

Worli, Mahim and Sion, is one of the seven Koliwadas located at

the northernmost edge of the island city of Mumbai and the Koli

residents thereof hold legally recognised ownership titles over the

lands traditionally owned/occupied by them. It is submitted that

over the last several years, extensive slum settlements have

mushroomed in and around the areas surrounding Dharavi

Koliwada, resulting in Dharavi being widely identified as one of

the largest slum agglomerations in the world.

6. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, by

Resolution No. 32 dated 26th October, 1920 of the erstwhile

Bombay Improvement Trust, the area for the Dharavi Street

Scheme, being Scheme No.56, was recorded as 26,79,051 square

yards. After deducting the area for roads and open spaces, the

total area of the said Dharavi Street Scheme was determined as

19,01,394 square yards. The then Government of Bombay vide its

Order No.1020 dated 28th January, 1921, inter alia, referring to

7
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

Government Order, General Department No.10201 dated 28th

November, 1919, revised the estimates of costs for Acquisition and

Works mentioned therein.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner was at pains to point

out that there is an anomalous situation viz. only the

houses/residences of the fisherfolk have been excluded from the

DRP established for slum rehabilitation scheme for Dharavi

Notified Area (“DNA”, for short) and certain portion of land as

well as dwelling structures/buildings of the Kolis of Dharavi

Koliwada, viz. fish and net drying land; Holi Maidan; Khambhadev

Temple and its peripheral ground/area; 3 churches i.e. St. Anthony

Church, Pentecost Church and Methodist Karnad Church;

Cemetery; Crematorium and open land/spaces (extended land)

traditionally being used by the fisherfolk at Dharavi Koliwada for

religious, cultural and festival activities for several decades and

several houses of fisherfolk which are spread over the entire land

between “Y” junction and Dharavi Main Road up to St. Anthony

Church and Sant Kakkayya Marg up to “T” junction i.e. the

extended land and houses and the portion of land between the

8
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

Mahim Creek from “T” junction to “Y” junction on Mahim-Sion Link

Road have not been excluded from the DRP.

8. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner in this

regard had been addressing several communications/

correspondence, since the year 2013, to the concerned authorities

of the State of Maharashtra, inter alia, requesting that a proper

and complete survey be carried out of the entire Dharavi Koliwada

and the said extended land, traditionally being used by the Kolis of

Dharavi Koliwada for the purposes above mentioned, and upon

such proper and complete survey, after ascertaining, determining,

demarcating and finalising the outer boundary of Dharavi

Koliwada, to exclude and delete such area forming part of Dharavi

Koliwada from the DRP and accordingly incorporate it in

Development Plan-2034.

9. It is then pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner

that the SRA, the Special Planning Authority for the DNA for DRP,

by its letter dated 15th October 2008, informed the petitioner that

the Dharavi Koliwada Gaothan had been excluded from the DRP.

9

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

The letter further stated that an organisation named “Mashal” had

been directed to conduct a survey of the total constructed area of

the Dharavi Koliwada residents.

10. By a subsequent letter dated 15th November, 2008, the

SRA again reiterated that the Dharavi Koliwada Gaothan had been

excluded from the DRP, though inadvertently included in DRP,

and further clarified that it should be treated as excluded from the

DRP. The letter further requested the Dharavi Koliwada residents

to extend cooperation to the said Mashal organisation for

conducting of the survey of Dharavi Koliwada. It is the grievance

of the petitioner that though it was confirmed that Dharavi

Koliwada was not included in the DRP, no survey was conducted

for finalising the outer boundary of Dharavi Koliwada so as to

exclude and delete such area forming part of Dharavi Koliwada

from the DRP resulting in further encroachments on the extended

land of Dharavi Koliwada which land was and is being traditionally

used by the fisherfolk for fishing and allied activities for several

centuries.

10

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

11. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the

petitioner that the Revenue and Forest Department of respondent

No.1, by Resolution dated 19th November, 2012, decided to permit

a minimum Floor Space Index (FSI) of 2.00 for Koliwadas in

Mumbai City and the Mumbai Suburban District, at par with

Gaothans, and mentioned that since the boundaries of Koliwadas

were not reflected in the land records, their demarcation was

required to be carried out in accordance with the Maharashtra

Land Revenue Code, 1966 (“MLRC”, for short) for which a

Committee was constituted to conduct surveys, prescribe the

demarcation procedure and frame guidelines.

\

12. It is the petitioner’s case that despite SRA’s letters dated

15th October, 2008 and 15th November, 2008, confirming that

Dharavi Koliwada Gaothan had been excluded from the DRP, by a

Government Resolution dated 20th November, 2012, the

Government decided to undertake external demarcation of

boundaries of Koliwadas in Mumbai City and the Suburbs.

13. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during

11
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

the hearing that was held on 13th June, 2013 before the Chief

Executive Officer of the SRA, the petitioner had specifically

pointed out that the boundaries of Dharavi Koliwada as shown in

the DRP were incorrect and that adjoining lands owned and

traditionally used by fishermen, mentioned in paragraph No.8 of

the writ petition ought to have been excluded from the DRP and

included within the Dharavi Koliwada boundary limits. However,

despite more than 12 years since then, no decision, till date, has

been taken.

14. Pursuant to the decision taken by the State of

Maharashtra vide resolution dated 19th November, 2012, the

Committee constituted thereunder along with the officials of the

Fisheries Department undertook site inspections of Koliwadas in

Mumbai. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner, pursuant

to the hearing held on 13th June, 2013, kept on pursuing the

matter with the concerned authorities of the State of Maharashtra.

Despite repeated correspondence, no steps were taken to include

the portion of area/land mentioned above as the Dharavi Koliwada

and exclude the said area from the DRP. On 5 th September, 2015,

12
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

in the survey, Dharavi Koliwada was identified as a continuous

settlement forming part of Graph/Sheet No.721, consisting of

about 160 houses of Koli residents primarily engaged in fishing.

15. Pursuant to Government Letter dated 1st November, 2018,

the officials of Mumbai City Survey and Land Records carried out

the measurement of the external boundaries of Dharavi Koliwada.

It is the grievance of the petitioner that the entire stretch of the

extended land/area and all the lands/dwellings/structures/

buildings mentioned hereinabove, which form a part of the

Dharavi Koliwada, were not surveyed by the said Committee and

officials of the Mumbai City Survey and Land Records Department.

Learned counsel for the petitioner was at pains to point out that

the concerned authorities of the respondent No.1 have not taken

any final decision on the said survey and determination,

demarcation and finalisation of the outer boundaries of any of the

Koliwadas in Mumbai, much less of Dharavi Koliwada.

16. Thus what the petitioner wants in this petition is to

exclude Dharavi Koliwada, which comprises of the Gaothan and

13
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

the portion of land, buildings and structures, mentioned in

paragraph 8 of the petition, from the DRP and demarcate the same

as part of Dharavi Koliwada. The Gaothan has been excluded. The

Collector by letter dated 13th April, 2018 informed that the

Maintenance Surveyor from the Mumbai City Survey and Land

Records would visit the site on 25th April, 2018, to carry out

boundary measurement.

17. It is the petitioner’s case that on 11th November, 2018, the

office of the Collector, Mumbai issued a Public Appeal, inter alia,

stating that the outer boundaries of Mumbai’s seven Koliwadas

were shown on the survey graphs maintained by that office.

Further, following demands at the Government level, a Committee

comprising of the officers from the Collector’s Office and the

Fisheries Department, would conduct site measurements from 12th

November, 2018 onwards. Pursuant thereto, a survey was

conducted between 12th and 15th November, 2018. On 15th

November, 2018, the Committee recorded that Dharavi Koliwada

measured 2,00,830 square meters which comprised residential

14
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

houses, fish and net drying areas, open spaces, a community

temple, dharamshala, cemetery, and crematorium. It is therefore

the case of the petitioner that the areas where the fisherfolk have

been traditionally carrying out these activities since centuries have

not been included as a part of Dharavi Koliwada. Further,

according to the petitioner, the entire portion of land mentioned in

paragraph No.8 of the petition constitutes an area far greater than

2,00,830 square meters. According to the learned counsel for the

Petitioner, the determination, demarcation and finalisation of

extended land and its outer boundary has not been

approved/finalised till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

relied upon the Public Appeal dated 11th November, 2018, Survey

Map/Plan of survey carried out on 15 th November, 2018 and

Panchanama dated 15th November, 2018.

18. Thus, in essence, the petitioner’s case is that without even

determining, demarcating and finalising the extended land and its

outer boundary, which process is still underway, the respondent

No.4 is proceeding with the project. Further, a report of the

demarcation was submitted to the State Government and all

15
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

authorities were required to give a hearing and submit their

opinions before finalisation of persons whose lands fell within the

proposed demarcation. The petitioner relied upon a letter of the

Collector dated 9th August, 2019 informing the petitioner that the

Government had not yet conducted the required hearing and no

final decision had been taken on the Map of Dharavi Koliwada.

19. A reference is then made to the information received

under Right to Information Act, 2005 as revealed by the Assistant

Commissioner (Estate) of the Corporation, that the lands acquired

by the Corporation for municipal and public purposes do not form

part of Koliwadas and some of such lands were under

rehabilitation proposals, thereby indicating that such lands and

land falling within the Koliwada and Gaothan should be excluded

from rehabilitation proposals. Reliance is then placed on the

Circular dated 5th April, 2022 of the CEO of SRA directing that no

Slum Rehabilitation Scheme and related survey activity be carried

out in Koliwadas and Gaothans where demarcation surveys had

already been conducted.

16

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

20. Learned counsel for the petitioner then pointed out that

somewhere in June 2022, the office of the Collector, Mumbai,

prepared a draft communication addressed to the Additional Chief

Secretary (Revenue) of the State Government, regarding

demarcation of Koliwadas, inter alia, stating that, as directed by

the Revenue and Forest Department, all public authorities whose

lands were included in the measurements must be given hearings

before such finalisation. It was further mentioned that the DRP

had raised an objection stating that as per the Notification dated

3rd March, 2016, approving the Dharavi Planning proposal, only

23,665.64 square meters had been earmarked as Koliwada area,

whereas the measurement carried out by the office of the Collector

between 12th to 15th November, 2018 reflected a substantially

larger area of 2,00,830 square meters and therefore the

boundaries of Dharavi Koliwada were required to be corrected and

confirmed. Therefore, in view of conflicting claims and inclusion of

lands belonging to several public bodies, the Collector’s office

opined that the final decision on Koliwada demarcation must be

taken at the Government level.

17

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

21. The petitioner by a letter dated 29th February, 2024,

submitted objections to the Special Land Acquisition Officer of the

SRA/DRP, opposing both, the Dharavi Koliwada boundaries and

the proposed re-survey of areas falling within the Dharavi

Koliwada. In the representation, a reference was made to the

hearing held on 13th June, 2013 before the Chief Executive Officer

of the SRA in relation to the DRP, where the incorrect limits shown

in the Project were objected to and proper demarcation through

the Survey and Land Records Department was sought and agreed

upon. The petitioner objected to the respondent No.4-developer’s

reliance on the Planning Proposal approved on 3rd March, 2016, to

define the Koliwada limits, and demanded that the survey (for the

purposes of demarcation of outer boundary of Dharavi Koliwada)

carried out on 15th November, 2018 through the Survey and Land

Records Department, be accepted, approved and finalised.

22. By a public notice dated 11th March, 2024, the

Corporation announced a door-to-door survey of slum dwellers

from 18th March, 2024, to determine eligibility in the DNA. The

18
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

petitioner, by a communication dated 19th March, 2024, objected

to this proposed re-survey, inter alia, contending that Dharavi

Koliwada had been excluded from the DRP vide letters dated 15 th

October, 2008 and 15th November, 2008 and that its outer

boundaries had been again surveyed on 15th November, 2018. The

petitioner contended that the proposed survey including areas in

Sectors 4 and 5, overlapped with the Koliwada’s outer boundaries

and asserted that no survey should be conducted until those

boundaries were finally approved.

23. By a representation dated 6th May, 2025, made to the

Deputy Secretary, Housing Department, Government of

Maharashtra, the petitioner objected to the Housing Department’s

notifications dated 4th October, 2024 and 24th January, 2025,

which according to the petitioner wrongly indicated Dharavi

Koliwada within Sectors 4 and 5 of the DRP. It was accordingly

requested that the measured area of approximately 2,00,830

square meters be excluded from the DRP and for the same to be

recognized as a part of Dharavi Koliwada for the Koli community.

19

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

24. The petitioner then by its representation dated 16 th

September, 2025 made to the CEO of the DRP, objected to the

proposed handing over of the possession of MHADA buildings as

these buildings stood on land traditionally being used by the Kolis

of Dharavi Koliwada for fishing and allied activities and that the

said development had been undertaken without consulting the Koli

fisherfolk. It was therefore requested that respondent No.4 should

not take any action in respect of these lands or buildings until the

outer boundaries of Dharavi Koliwada were determined,

demarcated, finalised and included in the Development Plan-2034.

It is then the case of the petitioner that without determining these

outer boundaries, around March 2025, officials of public bodies

such as the GRP, MTNL, BEST, ONGC, and AEML, facilitated the

illegal handing over of possession of their lands and structures to

respondent No.4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended

that these lands on which the building stood, including the

foreshore land of Mahim Creek have been traditionally used by

Dharavi fisherfolk for their fishing and allied activities for several

centuries.

20

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

25. It is submitted that the lands on which the buildings are

shown as existing/constructed is foreshore land which does not

have any plot/C.S. number but has wrongly been shown to be a

part of C.S. Nos. 343 and 347. It is the petitioner’s case that these

housing societies do not have any ownership rights nor any leases

in their favour and therefore have no legal right to handover

possession of land of their respective housing societies situated on

the said foreshore/Government land to respondent No.4.

26. A representation was therefore made by the petitioner to

the Hon’ble Chief Minister on 27th October, 2025 objecting to the

illegal transfer and handing over possession of buildings

constructed by MHADA under Pantpradhan Anudan Prakalp on

foreshore lands, occupied and traditionally used by the fisherfolk

of Dharavi Koliwada, again seeking finalisation of the outer

boundary along with recognition of extended land rights for the

Koli community.

27. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the

unauthorised constructions that had been carried out by MHADA

21
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

on Mahim Creek lands, falling within the boundary area of Dharavi

Koliwada particularly on Survey Nos. 343 and 347, are so

constructed without proper documentation and consultation with

the community and without proper survey and finalising of the

demarcation of the outer boundary of Dharavi Koliwada.

According to the petitioner several representations have been

made and objections were raised before various authorities from

15th November, 2008 right upto 30th December, 2025 but no

response has been received.

28. The petitioner, through an advocate, issued a notice

dated 27th January 2026 to the respondent Nos.1 to 4, inter alia,

bringing to their notice (i) the illegal handing over of the said

lands and buildings/structures standing thereon, in and around

the Dharavi Koliwada, by the housing societies of employees of

GRP, MTNL, BMC, BEST, ONGC, and AEML to respondent No.4

and respondent No.4 proceeding to put up corrugated tin sheets

and barricade the said lands/buildings/structures without the

concerned authorities of respondent No.1 first ascertaining,

demarcating, finalising and incorporating the outer boundary of

22
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

Dharavi Koliwada in the Development Plan-2034; (ii) further

calling upon them to direct respondent No.4 to cease, desist, and

restrain the illegal handing over of possession of the said lands by

the societies of GRP, MTNL, BEST, BMC, ONGC, and AEML to

respondent No.4; (iii) to restrain Respondent No.4 from taking

over possession of the said lands without any authority and/or

Government Notification/Resolution; and (iv) to direct the

concerned authority/officials of respondent No.1 to

undertake/conduct a proper and complete survey of the entire

land from “Y” junction (Mahim-Sion Link Road and Dharavi Main

Road) to “T” junction (Sion-Bandra Link Road to Mahim-Sion Link

Road), including Dharavi Main Road, Khambadev Temple,

Khambhadev Temple Road and Sant Kakkayya Road up to St.

Anthony Church and Good Shepherd Church which have been left

out in the survey conducted between 12th and 15th November,

2018 (Exhibit-“F-1”), within 10 days from receipt of the said

notice, under intimation and notice to the petitioner, failing which

the petitioner would be constrained to initiate legal proceedings

for redressal of its long-standing grievances and seek justice.

23

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

29. The respondent No.4-Developer by its letter dated 9th

February, 2026, responded to the petitioner’s advocate’s notice,

informing that it was a SPV company formed for redevelopment

and implementation of DRP; the implementation of the Scheme is

under the provisions of the Slum Act and DCPR, 2034 and denied

any illegal handing over of possession of land and

structures/buildings and further mentioned that it is in the process

of barricading the premises of the aforesaid buildings.

30. The respondent No.2-DRP/SRA by a letter dated 3rd

December 2025 informed the petitioner of the following which is

extracted as under :-

(i) the Urban Development Department vide
Resolution No. TPB 4314/810/Pra.Ka.203/ 2014/NaVi-
11/dated 3rd March, 2016, had approved Dharavi
Notified Area and an area of 23,665.64 square meters of
Dharavi Koliwada was excluded therefrom;

(ii) the Collector, Mumbai, had on 14th October,
2024, submitted his report in respect of demarcation of
(boundary) Dharavi Koliwada to the Additional Chief
Secretary (Revenue) who in a meeting held on 7th
October, 2024, had directed that a high level Committee

24
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

to take appropriate decision and further that the work in
that regard is in progress;

(iii) that vide Resolution No. TPB 4314/810/Pra.Ka.
203/2014/navi-11/dated 3rd March, 2016, Maharashtra
Nature Park was excluded from the Master Plan of DRP;

(iv) that vide G. R. dated 4th October, 2024, an
independent Committee in respect of Religious places in
the DNA is constituted and the work in regard is in
progress;

(v) that various public facilities have been planned
in the Master Plan prepared by the SPV (i.e. respondent
No.4); and

(vi) that GRP, BEST, AEML and ONGC have legally
handed over possession to NMDPL (respondent No.4).

31. Thus, the upshot of the petitioner’s contention is that the

lands traditionally used by the fisherfolk community for fishing

related activity should be excluded from the DRP. The housing

societies/buildings of various authorities mentioned hereinbefore

are standing on lands which were traditionally used by the

fisherfolk and therefore these agencies have illegally handed over

the possession of their buildings and lands to respondent No.4. In

25
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

any case it is submitted that even before the survey can be

completed by the concerned authorities under the MLRC, the work

in respect of the DRP is progressing to the detriment of the

petitioner.

32. Our attention is invited to a communication dated 7th

April, 2026 addressed by the Revenue and Forest Department to

the SRA, Collector, Mumbai and the concerned authorities that the

meeting in respect of the demarcation of the boundaries is

scheduled on 8th April, 2026. It is the submission of learned

counsel for the petitioner that the respondents have not adhered to

the procedure prescribed under the provisions of Chapter III of the

MRTP Act. It is therefore submitted that the respondent No.4’s

taking possession of and proceeding to barricade the

lands/buildings/structures in Dharavi Koliwada is tantamount to

respondent Nos.1 to 3’s allowing respondent No.4 to undertake

development in Dharavi Koliwada, which is an activity contrary to

and in violation of Regulation 33(16) of DCPR 2034.

33. On the other hand, Mr. Ravindra Kadam, learned Senior

Advocate appearing for the respondent No.4, Ms. Sabharwal,

26
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2, Mr. Milind

More, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the

respondent No.1 and Ms. Ghuge, learned counsel appearing for the

Corporation, opposed the petition. It is submitted that the

petitioner has no locus to maintain the petition. It is further

submitted that this petition is highly belated and that too without

challenging the DRP of the DNA which was sanctioned to take

effect from 17th March, 2016 under Government Notification dated

3rd March, 2016 published at page Nos.181 and 182 in part I of

Maharashtra Government Gazette dated 17th March 2016. Reliance

is placed on the map which was produced by the petitioner to

indicate that the lands in respect of which the exclusion is sought

by the petitioner from the DRP have existing buildings, as

admitted by the petitioner themselves, and that the entire area is

covered by slums. It is submitted that the petitioner’s insistence for

a demarcation of the boundaries at such a highly belated stage is

without any authority of law as the SRA, which is competent

authority to carry out this exercise, has already done so after

following the due procedure laid down in the Slum Act. The book

27
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

titled ‘Dharavi Notified Area, Planning Proposals’ is relied upon,

which is in public domain. The same is taken on record and

marked as Exhibit “X” for identification. There is no objection by

any of the parties to the reliance placed on this book. The same

has been certified by the CEO of the SRA.

34. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well

as the learned counsel for the respondents at length. We have

considered the materials on record.

CONSIDERATION

35. In the context of the submissions made by the learned

counsel, it would be useful to make a detailed reference to the

book titled ‘Dharavi Notified Area, Planning Proposals’ for properly

appreciating the controversy. The Dharavi Redevelopment Project

viz. DRP was sanctioned to take effect from 17th March, 2016

under Government Notification dated 3rd March, 2016 published at

page Nos.181 and 182 in part I of Maharashtra Government

Gazette dated 17th March, 2016. For the DRP of the slum scheme,

a Planning Team comprising of senior officers including the Chief

28
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

Executive Officer and Officer on Special Duty, DRP/SRA was

formed. The preamble of the DNA is significant to appreciate the

need for the development of the said area. Clause 1 is the

preamble, which needs to be extracted, reading thus :-

“1. PREAMBLE
1.1 History of growth of Slum in Dharavi
Dharavi, located on the northernmost tip of Mumbai
island City, was the home of the Koli fishing community and
the Mahim Creek was their source of fish and livelihood for
centuries. Indeed, one of the Bombay Gazetteers mentions
Dharavi as one of the ‘six great Koliwadas of Bombay’.

The Portuguese were the first colonists to stake their
claim to the seven islands of Bombay in the 16th century: they
built a small fort and church at Bandra, on the opposite shore
from Dharavi. The years passed, the Koli fishermen continued
to fish in the Creek. The Riwa (Rehwa) Fort at Dharavi, locally
known as ‘Kala Qilla’, was built in 1737 by the second British
governor of Bombay, Gerald Aungier, on the banks of the Mithi
River. It was part of the larger British-built Bombay Castle.

The growth of Dharavi is closely interwoven with the
pattern of migration into Bombay. The first people to settle
there did so because the land, mainly used as an informal
rubbish dump, was free and unregulated. The marshy land
slowly grew more solid but even till the mid-1900s, parts were
so wet, people had to build foot-bridges to cross over.

By end-1800s, the potters from Saurashtra were
relocated here and set up their colony (Kumbharwada), as also
the Muslim leather tanners from Tamilnadu (because of the
proximity of the abattoir in Bandra). Artisans and embroidery
workers from Uttar Pradesh started the readymade garments
trade, and Tamilians set up a flourishing business, making
savories and sweets. This way, Mumbai being the commercial
capital of the country with unlimited opportunity for
employment attracted people from all parts of the country,
irrespective of region, caste, religion. Most of the land in
Dharavi is owned by government and government agencies and

29
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

so was the most suitable for the migrants to encroach and setup
informal settlement. Dharavi thus became an amazing mosaic
of villages and townships from all over India belonging to
different religions, languages, and entrepreneurs, all surviving
shoulder to shoulder.

As long as Dharavi was on the edge of the city, the main
city was not affected much by the squatters and their activities.
But as Mumbai expanded northwards and its population grew
with new industries, the pressure on land increased, and
Dharavi was drawn into the heart of the city. Once Dharavi was
a swamp, fishing village. Today it is a slum or rather collection
of slums.

Majority of land ownership was with Govt. and
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM). Slum
dwellers squatted on these lands and built hutments in
haphazard manner. An Act called the Maharashtra Slum Areas
(Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971
was
passed. Improvement works were defined therein. A census of
hutments was carried out in 1976 and photo-passes were
issued to slum families. Its people were provided with taps,
toilets and electrical connections as part of slum improvement
measures. The Sion-Mahim Link road, the 60 feet and 90 feet
roads, were all built around this time; sewer and water lines
were laid down. Transit Camps were built to relocate people
whose homes came in the way of new roads and other
infrastructural projects.

1.2 Past programmes of Government to develop Dharavi
In early part of 1985, the then Prime Minister Late Shri
Rajiv Gandhi earmarked / sanctioned Rs.100 crores for the
improvement of infrastructure and housing for the whole Island
city of Bombay, and a third of that sum was reserved for
Dharavi. The Prime Minister’s Grant Project (PMGP) was
initiated in 1987 and Maharashtra Housing and Area
Development Authority (MHADA) was declared as Special
Planning Authority (SPA) for Dharavi. Under the project about
27 buildings with number of houses were built thereby giving
shelter to good number of families.

Later on, after the year 1995, under the Slum
Rehabilitation Scheme (SRA) 86 Schemes were approved in
Dharavi in the period upto 2004. Majority of the Schemes were
based on TDR (Transferred Development Rights) and the TDR

30
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

generated from these projects were sold for use outside
Dharavi. Most of the schemes under SRA were along the major
developed roads of Dharavi. No major S.R Schemes were
proposed in the interior part of Dharavi due to inadequate
access and also due to the presence of larger number of
commercial / industrial units. These schemes were scattered in
whole of Dharavi and buildings were coming up in sporadic
manner along the existing roads. The SRA schemes lacked the
much needed emphasis on holistically planned urban
development including development of new roads, water and
sewerage and other amenities. Major part of Dharavi remained
in undeveloped and unhygienic condition.

1.3 Renewed Initiative of Government to develop Dharavi
Government of Maharashtra in the year 2003-04
decided to redevelop Dharavi as an integrated planned
township and an action plan for implementation of Dharavi
Redevelopment was approved by its G.R. dtd. 04.02.2004.
It was decided to develop it by using land as resource to cross-
subsidize the cost of development through sale component on
the basis Slum Rehabilitation Scheme by dividing it into sectors
and by appointing developers for the same. Government also
decided to notify the whole of Dharavi as undeveloped area
and to appoint a Special Planning Authority for planning and
development.

Government in Urban Development Department (UDD)
accordingly notified the lands admeasuring about 178.30 Ha
bounded as : on or towards North by Sant Rohidas Marg (Sion-
Bandra Link Road), on or towards North-West by Mithi River
(Creek)/Mahim Creek, on or towards North-East by Junction of
Sant Rohidas Marg and L.B.S. Marg, on or towards East by
Central Railway Tracks, on or towards South-East, West and
South-West by Western Railway Harbor Tracks as the Dharavi
Notified Area (DNA) under its notification no. TPB
4034/322/CR-56/04/UD-11, dtd. 09.03.2005 and appointed
Slum Rehabilitation Authority an authority constituted under
Section 3A of Maharashtra Slum Areas (I. C. & R.) Act, 1971 as
Special Planning Authority (SPA) for that area under sub
Section 1(b) of Section 40 of M.R. & T.P. Act, 1966. The
Notification is Annexed as Annexure – I.
Similarly, Government in U.D.D. notified the lands
admeasuring about 62.05 Ha bounded as: on or towards North

31
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

and North East by the Boundary of ‘H’ Block of Bandra Kurla
Complex (BKC), on or towards East by Refuse Transfer Station
outside ‘H’ Block area as per planning proposal of BKC
sanctioned under notification No.BKR-1177/262/UD-5 dated
9th April 1979, on or towards South-East by L.B.S. Marg, on
towards South by Southern boundary of Sant Rohidas Marg, on
or towards South-West and West by Western boundary of C.S.
no. 665 (Piwala Bunglow) and boundary of ‘H’ Block of BKC by
including existing Rajeev Nagar as Dharavi Notified Area under
its Notification no. TPB 4308/3499/CR-83/09/UD-11, dtd.

25.06.2009 and appointed SRA as the Special Planning
Authority for the same under sub Section 1 (b) of section of 40
of the M.R. & T.P. Act, 1966. The Notification is Annexed as
Annexure – II.

Plan showing the Dharavi Notified Area is enclosed
herewith as Plan No. 1.”

36. It is then pertinent to note that the book refers to the

present status of the development. Being appointed as Special

Planning Authority under the MRTP Act, 1966 for DNA, it is the

statutory duty of DRP/SRA to submit Planning Proposals to the

Government of Maharashtra to take suitable measures for

development of the area. In order to prepare the planning proposal

under Section 40(3)(d) read with Section 115 of the MRTP Act,

surveys were carried out to prepare the existing land-use map and

socio-economic study of the area. Accordingly, surveys were

carried out through M/s. Prashant Survey which was completed on

3rd May, 2005. Later during 2007-2009 Mashal Survey was

32
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

initiated to prepare computerized cadastral plan showing each

existing hut, amenities and infrastructure and to update the

existing survey maps within sector-5 prepared by M/s. Prashant

Survey. Unit of survey taken by Mashal were cluster and sub-

clusters within sectors. In the G.R. dated 4th February 2004 it is

stated that Dharavi will be developed as an integrated holistic

township by undertaking sectoral development. Initially there were

9 sectors but finally, it was decided to divide DNA into 5 sectors

and the sector boundaries are based on the major arterial roads of

proposed road network which is proposed for meeting the traffic

and transportation needs. These sector boundaries of 5 sectors are

marked on Plan no.2. These sectors were sub-divided into 97

clusters and 190 sub-clusters for the purpose of the survey. These

clusters are locally recognized as Nagars/wadas/societies. Mashal

Survey completed their work on 15th June 2009. The structures

which were taken into account are marked on the plan showing

their respective users such as Residential (R), Residential cum

Commercial (R+C), Commercial (C), Industrial (I) and Amenities

such as school, hospital, police station, police chowky, gymnasium

33
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

and religious structures. The amenity structures which were in

temporary slum structures are marked on the plan and treated as

residential structures for eligibility purpose. The said survey plan

shows the existing roads, open spaces, natural features, etc. also.

Thus the Existing Land Use Map of Dharavi is prepared and

available for analysis and planning of the future development, a

copy of which is enclosed as Plan no.2 to the said book.

37. It is further seen that LEA International Ltd. Canada, in

joint venture with LEA Associates South Asia Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi,

was appointed by DRP/SRA to undertake Traffic and

Transportation Study to provide initial advice from a

transportation perspective during 2007-08. It reviewed and

analyzed the existing systems and proposed new systems including

new roads, widening of existing roads, pedestrian facilities to

allow safe circulation within Dharavi and to external locations.

38. It is significant to note that the aspect as to which

property should be excluded was also taken into consideration.

Within DNA, there are many private properties which are already

34
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

developed or in the process of development and therefore they

were not required to be included in the redevelopment project.

All these properties were excluded from DRP area. Also, land

belonging to Railways and Central Government has been excluded.

77 Slum Rehabilitation Schemes were in progress within DNA.

All these properties have been marked as excluded properties,

after collecting details from the respective authorities. However, if

they desired to include the excluded area in the project area, they

had the option of becoming a part of integrated development to be

carried out by developer appointed for execution of the

redevelopment plan, by making an application to DRP/SRA. A plan

showing the excluded properties is numbered as Plan no.3.

Annexure-III contains the details of the excluded properties as per

the details collected from SRA, MCGM and as per the survey

carried out by Mashal. The DRP area has thereafter been worked

out as the DNA land excluding the excluded land/properties.

39. The Planning proposal is for the whole of DNA. A detailed

exercise was then carried out regarding existing land use analysis,

35
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

area of slum structures, Commercial and Industrial, Home Based

activities as Dharavi has substantial number of various

manufacturing units. Large population is involved in commercial

and industrial activities like Leather, Garment, Pottery, Food

processing, Plastic recycling etc., mostly in the informal sector. The

existing civic amenities are then set out, including the details of 26

schools in Dharavi which are run in temporary slum structures. It

is found that Kamraj School in sector – 3 is the only school which

is a legal structure falls in excluded area. The students are

crammed in small rooms with inadequate space and with no play

ground facilities. There is severe shortage of public health care

facilities in Dharavi area. Only one Municipal Hospital exists in

sector-3 as a branch of Lokmanya Tilak General Hospital of Sion.

Major hospitals like Lokmanya Tilak General Hospital at Sion and

KEM hospital at Parel are the nearest hospitals catering to the

medical needs of people living in Dharavi. There are many

community welfare halls constructed by Mumbai Slum

Improvement Board under the MLA funds but they are of different

sizes, and are used by respective neighbourhood localities for get-

36

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

together purpose or for community and family functions like

marriages etc. Public toilet blocks are seen everywhere,

constructed under Slum Improvement Programme but they are

inadequate in number and maintenance is poor.

40. It is specifically mentioned in the book that at present

Koliwada is an excluded area from the DRP Area. The details of

the properties/areas excluded from DRP in sector 1 to 5 are set out

in Annexure-III. Relevant is Serial No.27 in sector-4 which

describes Koliwada as the excluded area which works out to

23665.64 sq. mtrs. This excluded portion of Koliwada is shown in

Plan No.3.

41. The plans which are prepared include Plan No.1 viz. DNA

Plan; Plan No.2 viz. Existing Land Use Plan of Dharavi; Plan No.3

which is the Excluded Properties Plan; Plan No.4 which is plan

showing sectors and slum rehabilitation area/DRP Area; Plan No.5

which is land ownership plan; Plan No.6 which is proposed road

network plan; Plan No.7 viz. Proposed land use plan of Dharavi;

Plan No.7A which is the proposed land use plan of Sector 1; Plan

37
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

No.7B viz. Proposed land use plan of Sector 2; Plan No.7C viz.

Proposed land use plan of Sector 3; Plan No.7D viz. Proposed land

use plan of Sector 4; Plan No.7E viz. Proposed land use plan of

Sector 5; Plan No.7F viz. Proposed amenity plan of Dharavi, Plan

No.8 is the existing water supply plan; Plan No.9 is the proposed

water supply plan; Plan No.10 is the existing sewerage plan; Plan

No.11 is the proposed sewerage plan.

42. The Government of Maharashtra sanctioned the planning

proposals for DNA under Section 115(3) read with Section 40(3)

(d) of the MRTP Act on 3rd March 2016. It is pertinent to note that

a plan and the report of sanctioned planning proposals was kept

open for the inspection by the general public during the office

hours on all working days at the offices mentioned in the

notification. The notification was also published on the

Government website. It would be material to set out the

notification dated 3rd March, 2016 which states the procedure

followed, culminating in sanctioning of the planning proposals for

DNA.

38

 Bhogale                                                                    wpl-12541-2026.odt



                            "Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning
                            Act, 1966.

————————————————————-
Sanction to Planning Proposals for Dharavi
Notified Area under Section 115(3) of
Section 40(3)(d) of the Act.

GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA
Urban Development Departement
Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032.

Dated : 3rd March 2016.

No. TPB 4314/810/CR-203/2014/UD-11

Whereas, the State Government in the Urban
Development Department vide Notification No.TPB-

th
4385/40198/CR-776/85/UD-5, dated the 26 May 1987 has
sanctioned a Revised Development Plan for Dharavi Area from
“G” North Ward under the provisions of the Maharashtra
Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966
(Mah. XXXVII of 1966)
(hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”);

And whereas, the Government of Maharashtra considered
that the area from “G” North Ward, known as “Dharavi Area”

was in undeveloped condition and needed to be developed in a
comprehensive manner; and whereas in order to take urgent
and appropriate steps for the said development, the
Government of Maharashtra vide Notification Urban
Development Department No.TPB 4387/1798/CR-317/87UD-
5, dated 3rd June 1987 appointed the Maharashtra Housing and
Area Development Authority as the Special Planning Authority
for planning and development of Dharavi Area more
specifically defined in the Schedule appended thereto.

And whereas, for the Dharavi Area, the Government of
Maharashtra in Housing and Special Assistance Department
vide Notification No.SRP.1095/CR-37/Housing Cell, dated 16th
December 1995 appointed “Slum Rehabilitation Authority”

under the provisions of section 3A of the Maharashtra Slum
Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971
for Slum Redevelopment :

And whereas, the Maharashtra Housing and Area
Development Authority by Resolution No.5382 of 14th

39
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

December 1998, has requested the State Government to
denotify Maharashtra Housing and Area Development
Authority as a Special Planning Authority for Dharavi Area.

And whereas, the Government of Maharashtra, in
Housing Department vide Government Resolution No.>®iq;ks
२००३/Á.Ø.१८९/>®ilq&१v, dared 4th February, 2004 (hereinafter
referred to as “the said Resolution”) has decided to implement
Dharavi Development Action Plan and to declare “Slum
Rehabilitation Authority” as Special Planning Authority for the
said Area.

And Whereas, the the State Government in Urban
Development Department vide Notification No.TPB
th
4303/322/CR-56/04/UD-11, dated 9 March 2005 has
appointed Slum Rehabilitation Authority as the Special
Planning Authority (hereinafter referred to as “the said
Authority”) for the planning and development of Dharavi Area
namely Sector I to IV, more specifically defined in the Schedule
therein, under sub-section (1B) of section 40 of the said Act
(hereinafter referred to as “the said Notified Area”)

And Whereas, the the State Government in Urban
Development Department vide Notification No.TPB
th
4308/3499/CR-83/09/UD-11 dated 25 June 2009, has
appointed Slum Rehabilitation Authority as the Special
Planning Authority for the planning and development of
Dharavi Area namely Sector V, more specifically defined in the
Schedule therein, under sub-section (1B) of section 40 of the
said Act (hereinafter referred to as “the said Notified Area”)

And whereas, the said Authority has prepared the Draft
planning proposals for the area notified vide Notification dated
9th March 2005 and 25th June 2009 (hereinafter referred to as
“Dharavi Notified Area”) and published it in Maharashtra
Government Gazette dated 8th March 2013 and Local
Newspaper dated 9th March 2013;

And whereas, after hearing the suggestions/objections
received on the Draft planning proposals of Dharavi Notified
Area, the said Authority has submitted the planning proposals
to the Government for sanction vide letter dated 17th June
2014, is pursuant of Section 115 as substituted by clause (d) of
sub-section (3) of Section 40 of the said Act and made
compliance vide letter dated 4th February 2015.

40

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

And Whereas, the State Government in pursuant of
Section 115 as substituted by clause (d) of sub-section (3) of
Section 40 of the said Act, has sanctioned part of the Planning
Proposals vide Notification No.TPB 4314/722/CR-112/2014/
UD-11 dated 6th September 2014;

And whereas, in pursuant of Section 115 as substituted
by clause (d) of sub-section (3) of Section 40 of the said Act,
after making necessary enquiries and after consulting the
Director of Town Planning, Maharashtra State, Pune, the State
Government has decided to sanction remaining Planning
Proposals of Dharavi Notified Area with modifications as
specified in SCHEDULE-A herein below,

Now therefore, in exercise of the power conferred by in
pursuant of Section 115 a substituted by clause (d) of sub-
section (3) of Section 40 of the sand Act, the Government
hereby;

(A) Sanction the Planning Proposals with changes as
described in the Schedule appended thereto.

(B) Fixes the date on which the Planning Proposals is
published in the Official Gazette, as the date on which the said
sanctioned Planning Proposals shall come into force.

A plan and Report of sanctioned Planning Proposals shall
be kept open for the inspection by the general public during the
office hours on all working days at the following offices :-

(1) Officer of the Dharavi Redevelopment Project, Slum
Rehabilitation Authority, Griha Nirman Bhavan, Bhandra
(East), Mumbai-400051.

(2) Officer of the Chief Engineer (Development Plan)
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Mahapalika Marg,
Mumbai-40001.

(3) Office of the Deputy Director of Town planning,
Greater Mumbai having his office at ENSA Hutment E-Block,
Azad Maidan, Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai-400001.

This Notification shall also be published on the
Government website www.maharashtra.gov.in ”

41

Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

43. It is thus seen that the planning proposals have been

sanctioned with changes as described in the Schedule appended to

the Notification dated 3rd March 2016 after following the

procedure laid down by law and after hearing the

suggestions/objections received on the Draft planning proposals of

DNA. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner has not

challenged the Notification dated 3rd March 2016.

44. Even as per the book of planning proposals for DNA

which we have extensively referred above, Dharavi undoubtedly

was the home of the Koli fishing community and the Mahim Creek

was their source of livelihood for centuries. However, Dharavi,

which was once a swamp and a fishing village, is now a slum or

rather a collection of slums. Even the petitioner has stated that

Dharavi is an agglomeration of slums. Majority of the land

ownership was with the Government and Municipal Corporation of

Greater Mumbai (MCGM). Slum dwellers squatted on these lands

and built hutments in haphazard manner. The Government of

Maharashtra, in the year 2003-04, decided to redevelop Dharavi as

42
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

an integrated planned township and an action plan for

implementation of Dharavi Redevelopment was approved by its

Government Resolution dated 4th February 2004. After an

elaborate exercise by the Government which included its surveys,

existing land use analysis and after giving due consideration to the

existing civic facilities, Commercial and Industrial, Home Based

activities in Dharavi, the planning proposals for DNA were

sanctioned by Notification dated 3rd March 2016.

45. As indicated earlier, the Gaothan area of the Koliwada to

the extent of 23665.64 sq. mtrs. has already been excluded from

the DRP. Mr. Ravindra Kadam, learned Senior Advocate relied on

the map which was produced by the petitioner to demonstrate that

the DNA comprises of various buildings/housing societies of

employees of GRP, MTNL, BMC, BEST, ONGC and AEML. This is

admitted by the petitioner as well. Moreover, buildings

constructed by MHADA also form a part of the area claimed by the

petitioner for their traditional activities. These buildings were

constructed many years back. It is the petitioner’s case in

43
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

paragraph 29 of the petition that the petitioner objected to the

proposed handing over the possession of the MHADA buildings

and other buildings to the respondent No.4 on the ground that the

said buildings stood on land traditionally being used by the Kolis

of Dharavi Koliwada for fishing and allied activities. However, the

petitioner never raised an objection when the buildings were

constructed and it is only after the buildings were demolished as a

consequence of the Notification dated 3rd March 2016 for the

purpose of the DRP that the petitioner has now objected to the

barricading on the plea that no development activity can be

permitted on such lands as they claim exclusive user for carrying

out traditional fishing activities. Such a claim of the petitioner at

this juncture is highly belated and clearly untenable.

46. We do sympathise with the Koli community, for even as

per the planning proposals, Dharavi was the home of Koli fishing

community and as per the report, even till the mid-1900s, the

parts of Dharavi were so wet, that people had to build foot-bridges

to cross over. As per the book, most of the land in Dharavi is

owned by government and government agencies and thus, it was

44
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

most suitable for the migrants to encroach upon and setup

informal settlement. When the programme was initiated by the

Government to develop Dharavi in the early part of 1985, Dharavi

had already turned into a slum or rather a collection of slums. The

Government took the initiative to develop Dharavi by using land as

resource to cross-subsidize the cost of development through sale

component on the basis of Slum Rehabilitation Scheme by dividing

it into sectors and appointing developers for the same.

Accordingly, Government decided to notify the whole of Dharavi

as an undeveloped area and to appoint a Special Planning

Authority for its planning and development. Thus, even on the

basis of the materials on record, as a result of the construction of

housing societies on the land parcel which the petitioner claims to

have been traditionally used for fishing and allied activities and

also as a result of slums mushrooming on these land parcels, the

character of the land which was traditionally used by the Kolis of

Dharavi Koliwada for fishing and allied activities underwent a

complete change. It is for this reason that the plan for undertaking

the development of Dharavi was put in place after following the

45
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

procedure laid down under the Slum Act as well as the MRTP Act

leading to the Notification dated 3rd March 2016 sanctioning the

planning proposals. The area of 23665.64 sq. mtrs. comprising of

Dharavi Koliwada is an area excluded from the DRP. Mr. Kadam,

learned Senior Advocate for the respondent No.4 on instructions

submitted that the barricading is only on the portion which is

permissible and the development will not be carried out on the

excluded portion of the Koliwada Gaothan viz. 23665.64 sq. mtrs.

47. Let us deal with the objection of the learned counsel for

the petitioner that the State of Maharashtra had undertaken the

exercise of conducting survey and prescribing the demarcation for

Koliwadas in Mumbai City and the Mumbai Suburban District at

par with Gaothans since the boundaries of Koliwada did not reflect

in the land records and hence the development be stalled till this

demarcation is complete. Such demarcation was required to be

carried out in accordance with the MLRC. It is the petitioner’s case

that since such a demarcation exercise is underway in respect of

seven Koliwadas (which includes Dharavi) across Mumbai and the

46
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

Mumbai Suburban District, the DRP should be stalled till such

demarcation and survey is complete. We are afraid that this

argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is completely

misconceived. The exercise which the petitioner is referring to is in

respect of all the seven Koliwadas in Mumbai and Mumbai

Suburban District for the purpose of demarcating the outer

boundaries of the Koliwadas as per the MLRC. However, so far as

Dharavi is concerned, a detailed survey has already been

conducted in view of the proposed development of the slum in

accordance with the procedure prescribed by the Slum Act. It is

consequent to the issuance of the Notification dated 3rd March

2016, granting sanction to the planning proposals for DNA under

the MRTP Act, that the DRP is in progress. There is no challenge to

the Notification dated 3rd March 2016. We are inclined to hold

that the attempt on the part of the petitioner to stall the

development on the ground that the outer boundaries of the

Koliwada are not demarcated in terms of the procedure prescribed

by the MLRC, at such a belated stage, is in the teeth of the

Notification dated 3rd March 2016. Merely because the petitioner

47
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

has been making repeated representations to the authorities for

demarcating the outer boundaries of the Dharavi Koliwada, in our

considered view, cannot be a valid ground for grant of any relief in

favour of the petitioner. It is however open for the petitioner to

pursue their representations with the authorities under the MLRC

which they have so far resorted to.

48. Since learned counsel for the petitioner was at pains to

stress upon the importance of the survey qua the petitioner, at the

cost of repetition, what we gather from the pleadings of the

petitioner is that the Government of Maharashtra has taken a

decision to conduct the survey and fix the outer boundaries of all

the seven Koliwadas in the State of Maharashtra. However, so far

as the Dharavi Koliwada is concerned, once the slum scheme has

been implemented and the DRP has been sanctioned after

following the procedure prescribed by law, the very foundation of

the petitioner’s case that the redevelopment has to be stalled till

the survey is conducted in terms of the general directions issued

for demarcating the outer boundaries of all the seven Koliwadas in

Mumbai and Mumbai Suburban District in so far as Dharavi

48
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

Koliwada is concerned, must fail.

49. We find that the petitioner is mixing up the issue of

general directions for demarcation of the outer boundaries of all

the seven Koliwadas in Mumbai and Mumbai Suburban District

with that of the Dharavi Koliwada for which the planning proposal

has been sanctioned in terms of the provisions of the Slum Act and

the MRTP Act by the Notification dated 3rd March 2016 which has

attained finality.

50. It is significant to note that over a period of time, the

lands which the petitioner claims to have been used for traditional

fishing and allied activities, has already lost its character as such as

the same was subject matter of encroachments and agglomeration

of slums. As a result of the demolition of the buildings which were

handed over to the respondent No.4, the lands became vacant and

have been barricaded for development purpose. This can be no

reason for the petitioner to stake a claim over these lands at this

stage as this would completely frustrate the DRP.

51. Factually, it is not disputed by the petitioner that the

49
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

building structures of the housing societies have been handed over

voluntarily to respondent No.4 as they want to be a part of the

DRP. The petitioner’s case is that such handing over is illegal since

the buildings standing on the said portion of land ought to form a

part of Dharavi Koliwada. It is significant to note that nothing has

been pleaded as to what action the petitioner has taken over the

years against such societies when the buildings were being

constructed. Now that the housing societies, which have been in

existence for so many number of years, want to be a part of the

DRP, having handed over the lands and buildings standing thereon

to the respondent No.4, cannot create a ground for the petitioner

to claim a right over these lands at such a belated juncture.

52. The petitioner claims that as per the measurement and

inspection carried out by the officials of the Fisheries and City

Land Survey Department of the Government of Maharashtra, the

area of 2,00,830 sq. mtrs. forms a part of Dharavi Koliwada. There

is no material to indicate that the land admeasuring 2,00,830 sq.

mtrs. is presently situated on an open parcel of land utilised for

fishing and allied activities by the Koli community. It may so have

50
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

been in the past, several years ago, and even as per the certified

book of DNA, the entire Dharavi area was a Koliwada. The

materials on record demonstrate that DNA, which covers the

portion of 2,00,830 sq. mtrs. as well, has been encroached by

slums/structures. It is precisely for the reason of developing the

area of Dharavi covered by the slums that the provisions of the

Slum Act and the MRTP Act were triggered. In any case, the area

of 2,00,830 sq. mtrs. is a part of the DRP, sanctioned by virtue of

the Notification dated 3rd March 2016.

53. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that what

the petitioner wants is only a finalisation of the demarcation of the

outer boundaries of Koliwada traditionally used for fishing and

allied activities, in terms of the exercise undertaken by the

Fisheries and City Survey Department, and till this exercise of

identifying the boundaries is complete, no development be

undertaken on this portion admeasuring 2,00,830 sq. mtrs. We

are afraid that it is too late in the day to canvass such a

submission. As indicated earlier, this submission is in the teeth of

the exercise undertaken by the State of Maharashtra and the SRA

51
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

under the Slum Act, Development Control and Promotion

Regulations, 2034 leading to the issuance of the notification by

the State of Maharashtra dated 3rd March 2016 under the

provisions of the MRTP Act.

54. There is no challenge to the Notification dated 3rd March

2016 which has attained finality and even as 10 years have passed

since the issuance of the notification, the redevelopment work is in

progress. To interfere at the instance of the petitioner at such a

belated juncture would amount to an unwarranted exercise of the

extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court.

55. We have extensively reproduced the relevant portions

of the book titled ‘Dharavi Notified Area, Planning Proposals’ in the

earlier part of this judgment which demonstrates as to how

Dharavi, a traditional fishing hub of the Koli community, became a

collection of slums. There is absolutely no challenge to these

materials on record leading upto the issuance of Notification dated

3rd March 2016. The State of Maharashtra has followed the

procedure under the relevant provisions of law while finalising the

DRP. The development has commenced. Rights have been created

52
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

in favour of various stakeholders like the housing societies, who

have already handed over the possession to respondent No.4 being

a part of DRP.

56. With the passage of time and the manner in which

Dharavi became a cluster of slums, it is not now open for the

petitioner to claim exclusive rights for fishing and allied activities

on this area of 2,00,830 sq. mtrs. merely on the basis that the

survey by Fisheries and City Survey office is not finalised or on the

ground that in the past these lands were traditionally used for

fishing and other allied activities. We still leave it open for the

petitioner to pursue their representations with the concerned

authorities in respect of the survey conducted by the land records

office. We would have hesitated to answer the impact of the survey

by the Fisheries Department and the City Survey office on the

present DRP; however the very foundation of the petition is that

till such survey is complete, the development work in the area of

2,00,830 sq. mtrs. should not proceed. Hence we are constrained

to opine that such a survey would hardly be of any consequence

once the Notification dated 3rd March 2016 issued by the State of

53
Bhogale wpl-12541-2026.odt

Maharashtra has attained finality and holds the field and when

such development pursuant to the Notification has commenced.

57. We therefore do not find any merit in this petition.

Leaving the liberty of the petitioner open to pursue the

representation/s made to the State of Maharashtra/City Survey

office for demarcation of boundaries, the petition is dismissed.

No order as to costs.

                           (S. M. MODAK, J.)                            (M. S. KARNIK, J.)




Signed by: Pradnya Bhogale
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 18/04/2026 15:38:48                                  54
 



Source link