Netrekrishan Deraj Puri v. Slum Rehabilitation Authority Through The Chief Executive Officer

903.WP.2472.2025.DOC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2472 OF 2025 Netrekrishan Devraj Puri and another Petitioners versus Slum Rehabilitation Authority and others Respondents _______ Mr.Zubin Behramkamdin, Senior Advocate, with Ms.Nitya Parikh, Ms.Aditi Bhargava, Ms.Shikha Jain i/by Divya Shah Associates Mr. for Petitioners. Ms.Priyanka Bhadrashete for Respondent No.1 SrA. Ms.Poonam Mittal, AGP for Respondent State.

Mr.Bharat Jain i/by JNJ Law Associates for Respondent no.3. Ms.Pushpa Yadav for BMC.

_______

CORAM:

G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ.

DATE:

24th FEBRUARY 2026 P.C.

1.

We are totally dissatisfied with the affidavit filed by the Chief Executive Officer of Slum Rehabilitation Authority, dated 13th November 2025, which is filed pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 14th October 2025. We find that right from paragraph 2(a) of the affidavit none of the proposals in regard to Regulation 33(11) of the Development Control Regulations 2034 are disclosed to the Court, nor the proposals qua Regulation 33(10) are disclosed. This more particularly when the said scheme which is being executed at Pali Hill Road, Khar (West), Mumbai, is stated to be clubbed under another scheme, which is a land of whose ownership and situated at Andheri, is also not specified, being a scheme MANISH SURESHRAO THATTE Date: 2026.02.24 15:34:21 +0530 MANISH SURESHRAO THATTE under Development Control Regulation 33(10).

Laxmi

903.WP.2472.2025.DOC 2.

As to how and why these schemes at different places are sought to be clubbed together so as to assume jurisdiction on the part of Slum Rehabilitation Authority, is not clearly spelt out in the affidavit. Merely making reference to the Development Control Regulations and clubbing the same in the body of the affidavit, would not suffice. All the details in regard to both the schemes are required to be placed on record.

3.

We accordingly do not accept such affidavit, however, while not assuming that there is any wilful suppression of facts, we direct that an appropriate affidavit be filed by the Chief Executive Officer of SRA in supersession of the defective affidavit dated 13th November 2025.

4.

Accordingly adjourned to 26th February 2026. To be listed on supplementary board.

(AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) Laxmi