Bombay HC imposes Rs 5 lakh cost on woman for ‘fabricated’ documents in slum rehab case, warns of contempt action

A division bench of Justices Ajey S Gadkari and Kamal R Khata passed the order while hearing a review petition filed by Mumtaz H Khoja, who had sought a review of the court’s February 2024 order dismissing her plea for a direction to the authorities to allot her a rehabilitation tenement under the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) scheme.

Advocate Aseem Naphade, appearing for the petitioner, argued that she had been wrongfully denied a rehabilitation tenement by the SRA and the project developer, M/s Pioneer India Developers Pvt. Ltd., even though the rehabilitation buildings were ready for occupation. He said the petitioner had made repeated requests but was yet to be allotted a tenement and feared being permanently deprived of her entitlement.

Opposing the plea, advocate Mayur Khandeparkar for the developer submitted that the petitioner had already been allotted two rooms and was in possession of three premises, one of which she had failed to vacate despite temporary accommodation being provided to the Trust. The SRA supported the developer’s submissions.

The HC observed that the petitioner had “indeed suppressed material facts”. It said, “While she sought to portray herself as a senior citizen, dependent on her parents and in poor health, in order to evoke sympathy, the documents demonstrate that she is a practicing doctor by profession. She was in possession not merely of one but three separate structures.”

The court noted that the petitioner was illegally occupying a carpet area exceeding 2,200 square feet in the slum. “She has used one structure as her residence, the second as her clinic, and the third for running a school in the name of the said School Trust, of which she is the Chairperson,” the court said.

“…She has not only obtained residential accommodation and commercial accommodation but also premises for a school. In substance, she has suffered no deprivation,” the bench held, adding that she had remained silent for years before asserting her claims.

The court said the evidence produced by the petitioner to establish her occupation of the premises was “fabricated”.

It also directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and the SRA to conduct an inquiry into how the Trust was permitted to run a school with 150 students in the slum and whether the BMC had granted the necessary permissions, including a fire NOC, for the structure.

“The facts disclosed in this case reveal not only the dangers to which very young children have been exposed by individuals such as the petitioner, but also the apparent inaction and apathy of the BMC and the SRA in allowing such activities to continue, thereby jeopardising the lives of innocent children attending classes in unsafe and unauthorised structures,” the HC observed, while dismissing the review plea.