The Bombay High Court today ruled that MHADA has the authority to evict tenants from non-cessed as well as cessed buildings and structures. Now,the housing authority will have summary eviction powers under Section 95 A of the MHADA Act to evict people from dangerous structures as well as structures that have been approved for redevelopment with MHADA no-objection certificates. The issue arose following a redevelopment proposal for around 600 structures on the New Islam Mill compound on Currey Road. Occupants of two non-cessed structures refused to move out and filed a suit in a lower court. The lower court restrained MHADA from enforcing summary eviction. It observed that an NOC had been given under section 33(7) of Development Control regulations. The petitioners had said the government in June 2007 had clarified that cessed structures can be developed under 33(7) and non-cessed structures under regulation 32. Appearing for MHADA,G W Mattos said out of over 600 structures,85 are non-cessed and occupants of 83 have already evacuated their homes. Mattos contended that because of obstacles created by just two occupants the entire redevelopment project will be affected. He further argued that section 95 A does not draw a distinction between cessed and non-cessed structures and the government has issued a clarification to this effect through a subsequent government resolution. The lawyer for one of the occupants,Rukmini Ambre,said that even assuming the MHADA has been permitted following a clarification by state government to redevelop both cessed and non-cessed structures,the NOC has been issued under 33(7) which is only for cessed structures. Justice Nishita Mhatre ruled that the lower court had erred in restraining MHADA from carrying out the eviction,especially since there is no apprehension that the evicted persons would not be allotted premises in the redeveloped structures. The court has stayed the order for a period of eight weeks.
