Introduction:

In the case of Sayunkta Sangharsh Samiti vs. The State of Maharashtra , the dispute revolves around the implementation of a Slum Rehabilitation Scheme by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA). The primary parties involved are the Shramik Ekta Co-Operative Housing Federation (Respondent No. 6), represented by Lokhandwala Kataria Constructions (Respondent No. 5), and the Sayunkta Sangharsh Samiti (Appellant). The Appellant opposed the allotment procedure prescribed by the SRA, seeking preferential treatment based on a private arrangement reached between them and the Developer.

Arguments:

The Appellant contended that the SRA should honor the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between the Developer and the minority section of hutment dwellers. This agreement aimed for separate allotment in Towers D, E, and F, which conflicted with the SRA’s prescribed procedure outlined in Circular No. 162. Contrarily, the SRA and the State of Maharashtra maintained that the MoU was a purely private arrangement, not binding on the statutory procedures established for rehabilitation schemes. They emphasized the need to adhere to the established process, specifically the allotment through draw of lots for all eligible dwellers, as mandated by law.

Court’s Judgement:  

The Supreme Court emphasized the paramount importance of the SRA’s role as the final authority for implementing the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme. It highlighted that private agreements cannot supersede statutory mandates, and the SRA must act in accordance with its policies and circulars, safeguarding public welfare. The Court upheld the SRA’s prescribed procedure of allotment by draw of lots, stating that the private arrangement between the Developer and the Appellant lacked legal grounds. It directed the SRA to proceed with allotment in accordance with established procedures, also urging an investigation into the Developer’s circumvention of statutory processes.