Bombay High Court quashes government order acquiring lands under slum development scheme on ground of fraud

The Bombay High Court recently quashed a decision of the Maharashtra government to acquire over 7,600 square metres of land in the Mumbai suburbs for a slum redevelopment scheme, after observing that the proceedings leading to the notification appeared to be fraudulent [Bharat Patel v. SRA, Maharashtra & Ors].A division bench of Justices RD Dhanuka and MM Sathaye held that within a short span of time, the developer and the proposed society had managed to execute a development agreement, file a declaratory suit, come to a consensual agreement and obtain a court order behind the back of the owner.The acts subsequent to obtaining consent, including obtaining a no-objection certificate from the owner for the purpose of development of the property, would not legalize the order passed by the slum rehabilitiation authority (SRA) based on the fraudulently obtained consent decree, the Court said.“Since the entire order passed by the Chief Executive Officer of SRA is based on the such fraudulent consent decree depriving the Petitioner of his valuable rights in the writ property, the order passed by the Chief Executive Officer, SRA deserves to be quashed and set aside on this ground itself.".The petitioner Bharat Patel approached the High Court for quashing of the notification issued by the State government on November 17, 2016 by which it acquired a property in the Mumbai suburbs as part of a slum redevelopment project.On August 26, 2015, the SRA issued a public notice calling for owners of the land to show cause why the State government must not acquire the land under the rehabilitation scheme.Patel immediately raised objections to the acquisition on the ground that he would develop the land himself. He also pointed out that a portion of the land was marked as “roads for public access” as per the city development plan. Without removing that reservation as road, no scheme could have been filed for by any party, and the owner’s no-objection was required to change the reservation, he contended. Patel claimed that the SRA relayed to State government officials that the land owner had not objected to the acquisition proceedings. Instead of deciding those objections, Patel was served with a notice for fixing a date to hear on the payment of compensation, he submitted.He then challenged the acquisition proceedings before the High Court in 2016. However, despite pendency of the writ petition, the State government issued the acquisition notification without granting a hearing to Patel, he said in the petition..The developer had around the same time approached the city civil court in Mumbai seeking orders to restrain members of the proposed society from transferring the property to any third party except the developer for developing the property. The petitioner owner was not made party to such proceeding. “Within a very short span of time, a collusive suit came to be filed by the developer against proposed society for seeking absolute declaration for the property owned by Patel without impleading him as party to the suit. The consent terms filed by and between the proposed society and developer would clearly indicate that the same was collusive with a view to commit fraud upon the Court and Patel by suppressing Patel’s ownership over the property. Just prior to making an application for acquisition of the property, society and developer fradulently and in collusion with each other obtained consent decree”, the Court held. .Advocates Shardul Singh, Swapnila Rane and Vanita Kakar appeared for Patel. Additional Government Pleader Abhay Patki with Advocate Laxmikant Satelkar appeared for respondent State. Advocates Abhijeet Desai, Karan Gajra and Dilip Jadeja appeared for the SRA. Advocates Cherag Balsara and Pranesh Gada appeared for proposed society. [Read order]