HC rejects PIL against Bhendi Bazaar redevelopment project

The Bombay High Court today dismissed a PIL that challenged the 'Bhendi Bazaar Cluster Redevelopment Scheme', alleging that tenants were being evicted at gunpoint at the behest of the underworld.
"The allegations are not specific and are also vague, hence the petition is being dismissed. The scheme is very beneficial to local people and complaints, if any, can be lodged with the authorities," Justice Naresh Patil said.
The Bhendi Bazaar Cluster Scheme is one of the biggest redevelopment projects in Maharashtra on a 16.5 acre land located in the heart of the city in South Mumbai.
The scheme is being implemented by Maharashtra Housing Area Development Authority (MHADA) after a notification was issued by Urban Development Department of state government.

The PIL, filed by social activist Priya Rathod alleged that underworld had a hand in the project and people were being threatened at gunpoint to vacate their dwellings without being offered alternate accommodation.
It prayed for a CBI probe into the alleged criminal activities, such as threatening tenants at gunpoint to vacate their houses.

On behalf of Saifee Buhrani Upliftment Trust, which is supporting the scheme, counsel Satish Maneshinde said the allegations in the PIL were vague and baseless. There was absolutely no material to substantiate the allegations that tenants were being threatened at the behest of underworld.
He further said that the scheme was being implemented properly and some buildings have already been demolished. The tenants of these buildings, after eviction, were given accommodation in transit camps.

MHADA counsel argued the PIL was not against the project, but had challenged the procedures. MHADA had followed all the procedures in a legal manner and it had prepared an eligibility list for which there has been no complaint so far.
MHADA submitted that if the people were aggrieved, they could lodge a complaint with its Repair and Reconstruction Board, which would deal with the grievances.
Urging for dismissal of the PIL, MHADA submitted that if such a petition was allowed, it would amount to conducting an inquiry against the project.
CBI argued that no case had been made out in the PIL for investigation by the agency.