HC orders registration of case against MHADA officials

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday directed the police to register a case against officials of MaharashtraHousing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) for allegedly colluding with developers and causing a loss of Rs 40,000 crore to the state exchequer.

A division bench of Justices S C Dharmadhikari and S K Shinde was hearing a public interest litigation filed by Kamlakar Shenoy, claiming that MHADA has failed to take possession of around 1.37 lakh square meters of surplus area from developers after redevelopment of cessed buildings.

MHADA, the government housing agency, also looks after maintenance of hundreds of old and dilapidated privately-owned building in Mumbai, whose tenants pay its 'cess'.

The petitioner claimed that as per the Development Control Regulation 33 (7), any surplus area of a redevelopment project is the property of the state government.

Shenoy alleged that MHADA officials were aware of this provision but still failed to recover surplus area from builders who redeveloped cessed buildings.

The bench, in its judgment, directed the Economic Offences Wing of police to register an FIR within five days.

The court took note of a letter written by a senior official of the Anti-Corruption Bureau in April 2018 to the state government, claiming that the role of MHADA officials was not above suspicion in this matter.

"Despite a senior-ranking official of the ACB noting that prima facie cognizable offence was made out, both the city police's EOW and the ACB declined to entertain the petitioner's complaint.

"It is nothing but shirking of responsibility and acting in defiance of the law," the court said.

When a redevelopment project is sanctioned, part of the constructed area has to be surrendered to MHADA.

"Once the developer is granted permission to redevelop cessed buildings, MHADA officials, being public servants, were under statutory obligation to ensure recovery of surplus constructed area.

"But by wilful omissions, the MHADA officials allowed developers to appropriate such surplus area...and thereby caused huge loss to the state and unlawful gain to the developers," the high court said.

The surplus area was sold by developers in the open market, the court noted.