The approvals come under the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, even though the cases did not strictly qualify under Regulation 33(9)(b) of the Development Control and Promotion Regulations (DCPR) 2034. The government has clarified that these are exceptional, one-time measures that cannot be cited as precedent in any future case.

Project Background

The BDD chawl redevelopment project covering Worli, Naigaon and Na.M. Joshi Marg was approved by the state government on 30 March 2016. MHADA was appointed as the nodal agency under the “Sukoon Abhiyan”. A notification dated 27 December 2016 inserted Regulation 33(9)(b) in DCPR 2034 to enable rehabilitation of eligible pre-1 January 2000 structures.

The regulation, however, contains strict conditions. Clause 3(a) generally bars rehabilitation for tenancies created after 13 June 1996. Toilet rooms, being common facilities and not regular tenements, also fall outside normal eligibility. Despite this, the government examined the actual long-term residential use in both cases through inspections and hearings.

Worli – BDD Chawl No. 61: Jayashree Gunratan Bansode

Smt. Jayashree Gunratan Bansode has been residing in the ground-floor middle toilet room of Chawl No. 61, Worli, along with her two children since 1994. Her father has lived in the chawl since 1924; she returned to her parental home after marriage for family reasons.

During the redevelopment survey, her occupation came to light. She was given a personal hearing before the Additional Chief Secretary (Housing). She produced a 2007 bank passbook, a 2010 no-objection certificate from other chawl members regarding her stay, and her 2018 voter identity card. However, she could not submit documents specifically from 1994.

A joint inspection on 2 February 2026 by BDD officials and the Director confirmed that she and her family were actually residing in the toilet room for residential purposes. While the case did not meet the standard cut-off requirements of Regulation 33(9)(b), the government noted the long possession and pre-2000 structure provisions. It decided to treat the matter as a special, one-time exception and include her for a 25 sq.m. rehabilitation tenement.

Na.M. Joshi Marg – BDD Chawl No. 18: Malan Baburao Badekar

This case had reached the Bombay High Court. Smt. Malan Baburao Badekar has been living in the first-floor middle toilet room (18/81) of Chawl No. 18 at Na.M. Joshi Marg, Naigaon, for over 40 years (since around 1985). Her late husband, Baburao Badekar (who passed away in 2024), was employed in the Electricity Department and had been allotted the space as service quarters in 1978.

After the chawl was vacated for redevelopment, an eviction notice was issued on 4 September 2025. She filed Writ Petition No. 39233 of 2025 in the Bombay High Court. Following court directions, a Court Officer along with PWD and MHADA representatives inspected the premises and confirmed residential use.

The High Court observed that she is a senior citizen, her family has used the space for residential purposes for decades, and she appeared entitled to permanent alternative accommodation (PAA) like other eligible residents. It directed sympathetic consideration.

She submitted pre-1996 documents including election identity card, medical certificates and her daughter’s marriage certificate. After a hearing before the Additional Chief Secretary (Housing) and fresh inspection confirming actual residence, the government approved her inclusion as a special one-time case for a 25 sq.m. rehabilitation tenement.

Government’s Rationale

In both GRs, the Housing Department clearly stated that the requests could not be granted under the normal provisions of Regulation 33(9)(b) because of the nature of the structures (middle toilet rooms) and, in one case, insufficient evidence of pre-cut-off tenancy creation.

However, the government took into account:

• Actual long-term residential use confirmed by joint inspections
• Documentary evidence of possession predating 1 January 2000
• Principles of natural justice and equity
• In the Naigaon case, the specific observations and directions of the Bombay High Court

The approvals were therefore granted as special, one-time exceptions only. Both GRs explicitly state that these decisions will not be treated as precedent and cannot be used in any other matter. The women will be rehabilitated in the new buildings coming up under the BDD project.

The GRs have been uploaded on the official Maharashtra government portal (www.maharashtra.gov.in) with computer codes 202607071713461709 and 202607071715030309 respectively. Copies have been sent to all concerned authorities, including MHADA, the Director of BDD Chawls, and the two women themselves.

Implications for Redevelopment Projects

These GRs highlight the practical challenges in old BDD chawl redevelopment where common facilities have sometimes been used as living spaces for decades due to space constraints or historical allotments (such as service quarters). They show that while the government will enforce cut-off dates and eligibility norms strictly in the larger project, it is willing to consider genuine, long-standing cases backed by evidence of actual residential use, especially when they involve vulnerable persons such as women and senior citizens.

For residents, housing societies and activists involved in BDD, MHADA or SRA redevelopment projects, the decisions underscore two key points: proper documentation of occupancy remains critical, and special representations supported by inspection reports and court observations can sometimes receive sympathetic consideration — though always as narrow, one-time exceptions.

The BDD Chawl Redevelopment Project continues to progress with MHADA as the implementing agency, aiming to replace decades-old structures with modern buildings while rehabilitating eligible occupants.

Also read: Sneak peak of BDD Worli homes post redevelopment

The post Maharashtra Approves Special Inclusion of Toilet Room Occupants in BDD Chawl Redevelopment appeared first on Square Feat India.

The order, issued on March 20, 2026, cancels directives imposed under Section 79(A) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960, bringing relief to an institution that has been under regulatory constraints for over two decades.

Background: Why Were Restrictions Imposed?

The corporation, which plays a key role in:

• Providing long-term housing loans
• Financing co-operative housing societies
• Supporting individual homebuyers

had faced severe financial stress in the early 2000s.

The crisis was triggered when it failed to repay loans taken from Life Insurance Corporation of India on time. As losses mounted and its financial health deteriorated, the state government stepped in.

Key actions taken earlier:

• In 2002, strict financial controls were imposed under Section 79(A)
• In 2008, some conditions were relaxed but core restrictions continued

These included:

• Capping operational expenses
• Restricting new hiring
• Limiting capital expenditure and expansion
• Mandating that 95% of recoveries be used for loan repayments

What Has Changed Now?

After a detailed review and based on recommendations from the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, the government has now decided to completely withdraw these restrictions.

The key reasons:

• The corporation has fully repaid its outstanding loans
• It is now debt-free
• It has reported consistent profits for the last three years
• It has complied with earlier government conditions

This marked improvement in financial health led authorities to conclude that continued restrictions were no longer necessary.

What This Means for the Housing Sector

This decision could have important implications for Maharashtra’s housing ecosystem:

1. Revival of a Key Housing Finance Institution

With restrictions lifted, the corporation can now operate more freely, potentially increasing lending to co-operative housing societies and individual buyers.

2. Boost for Co-operative Housing Segment

The co-operative housing model, especially relevant in Mumbai and other urban centres, may benefit from improved credit availability.

3. Greater Flexibility in Operations

The corporation can now:

• Expand operations
• Make new investments
• Improve service delivery

without prior government approvals that were earlier mandatory.

Bigger Picture

This move reflects a broader trend of reviving legacy financial institutions that play a crucial role in housing finance, particularly in the co-operative sector.

For real estate stakeholders, especially in Mumbai, this could translate into:

• More financing options
• Improved liquidity in the co-operative housing space
• Potential support for redevelopment and affordable housing segments

Also Read: RBI Gives a Nod for Self-Redevelopment Loans to Cooperative Housing Societies

The post After 22 Years, Maharashtra Lifts Financial Restrictions on State Co-op Housing Finance Corporation appeared first on Square Feat India.

The case revolves around Mulund Sandhyaprakash Cooperative Housing Society Limited, a small 11-flat society in Mulund (West), Mumbai. The society’s building had become old, and in April 2017, the general body passed a resolution to redevelop it. After negotiations, M/s. Space Master Realtors (the developer) was selected. On July 2, 2021, the society signed a Redevelopment Agreement (DA) with the builder, promising bigger flats, transit rent, and other benefits in exchange for extra FSI rights.

The DA included an arbitration clause (Clause 38), meaning any disputes would go to a private arbitrator instead of regular courts. Nine members signed or consented, but one resident — Neeta Sawant, owner of Flat No. 10 — strongly opposed the project from the start. She filed complaints, refused to vacate, and deliberately never signed the DA.

The builder obtained Intimation of Disapproval (IOD) in November 2023 and asked members to vacate. Ten families complied, but Neeta Sawant refused. The builder then approached the Bombay High Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act and got an order in August 2024 directing her to vacate (with a Court Receiver appointed to take possession if she didn’t). Possession was handed over via the Court Receiver on November 15, 2024.

Only after losing her flat did Neeta Sawant sign a Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreement (PAAA) on November 14, 2024 (registered later), agreeing to Flat No. 8001 in the new building named Chandan Heights, plus transit rent. This PAAA had its own limited arbitration clause, but only for disputes related to rent, flat size, etc. — not the main DA.

The builder later claimed massive losses (over ₹13.13 crore) due to the delay caused by her refusal to vacate earlier. On July 28, 2025, the builder sent a legal notice demanding payment and invoking the arbitration clause from the DA (which she never signed). When she refused, the builder filed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act before Justice Sandeep V. Marne, asking the court to appoint an arbitrator against her.

After detailed arguments (including help from senior lawyers Mayur Khandeparkar for the builder and Karl Tamboly for the resident), the court delivered its judgment on March 6, 2026.

Justice Marne ruled:

• Arbitration requires explicit written consent from both sides.
• A dissenting member who refuses to sign the DA is not bound by its arbitration clause.
• Being a beneficiary of redevelopment (getting a new flat/rent) or signing PAAA later does not automatically make someone a party to the DA’s arbitration clause.
• The builder can sue for money in a normal civil court, but cannot force private arbitration against someone who never agreed to it.

The application was dismissed — a clear win for Neeta Sawant and, by extension, any flat owner who says “no” to redevelopment and refuses to sign the main agreement.

Legal experts say this judgment strengthens the position of dissenting members: builders can get interim relief (like possession orders) against them, but cannot shortcut disputes through private arbitration if the member never consented in writing to that mechanism.

For society members worried about being pressured by builders during redevelopment — this ruling sends a strong message: If you don’t sign the main deal, you keep your right to fight in open court.

Also Read: Can a Housing Society Claim Tax Deduction on Interest from Co-operative Banks?

The post No Signature, No Private Court Hassle: Landmark Win for Society Members Opposing Redevelopment appeared first on Square Feat India.

The move comes after sustained objections from mill workers’ unions, representations to the government, and political pressure over a clause that was widely seen as harsh and unfair.

What the Government Changed

In a Government Resolution issued on 15 March 2024, the state had approved housing for eligible workers from 58 closed or sick textile mills in Mumbai and their legal heirs. However, Clause 17 of that resolution stated that:

If a mill worker or heir refused the house offered, their housing application would not be considered again.

This effectively meant a one-time refusal led to a permanent loss of housing rights, regardless of reasons such as location, size, or suitability of the dwelling.

Following strong opposition, the government has now issued a corrigendum GR dated 29 December 2025, officially deleting Clause 17.

Why This Decision Matters

With this correction:

• Eligible mill workers or their heirs will not lose their housing rights permanently if they reject a particular allotment
• Their applications can still be considered in future allotment cycles
• Workers will no longer feel forced to accept unsuitable housing out of fear

The change restores flexibility and fairness to a long-pending housing promise made to Mumbai’s textile workers.

Scale of the Mill Workers’ Housing Issue

The mill workers’ housing programme is one of Mumbai’s largest labour-linked housing initiatives. Nearly 98,600 mill workers have been identified as eligible for homes in the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR).

Despite this, actual allotments over the years have been limited, with only a fraction of eligible workers receiving homes through earlier MHADA allotment exercises. Many families have waited for decades since the collapse of Mumbai’s textile industry in the early 1980s.

Against this backdrop, any rule that risked permanent exclusion was seen as particularly severe.

Unions Welcome the Rollback

Mill workers’ unions had raised strong objections to the clause during meetings with the government in mid-2025, arguing that it punished workers for exercising choice and ignored ground realities such as distance from workplaces, medical needs, or family size.

The deletion of the clause is being viewed as a major relief and a recognition of the workers’ long-standing concerns.

What This GR Does — and Does Not Do

Removes a punitive condition
Protects future eligibility of mill workers
Makes the scheme more humane

Does not announce new houses
Does not expand eligibility
Does not immediately allot flats

The broader housing scheme remains unchanged, but its implementation is now less rigid.

Bigger Implications for Mumbai Housing Policy

At a time when Mumbai faces acute housing stress and land scarcity, the amendment signals a more sensitive approach to legacy labour housing issues. It also highlights how sustained public pressure can lead to course correction in policy.

How quickly homes are now allotted — and whether the scheme gains momentum — will be closely watched.

The post Maharashtra Govt Reverses Harsh Rule on Mill Workers’ Housing Allotment — “No More Lifetime Ban for Rejecting an Offered Home” appeared first on Square Feat India.

In an order passed on Wednesday, December 17, 2025, a Division Bench of Justice G.S. Kulkarni and Justice Aarti Sathe directed that no coercive action be taken against the petitioners until the matter is heard further, while also ordering a court-supervised site inspection to verify the actual nature of the premises.

The dispute: A ‘bathroom’ that became a home

The petition has been filed by Malan Baburao Beekar, widow of the late Baburao Beekar, along with another family member, who claim to be in occupation of Room No. 81, Chawl No. 18, BDD Chawl, NM Joshi Marg, Worli, since 1986.

According to the petitioners, although the room is shown in official records and redevelopment plans as a common bathroom, it has been used and recognised as a residential tenement for decades. The family argues that while other BDD Chawl occupants are being granted permanent alternate accommodation (PAA) under the ongoing redevelopment, they are being excluded solely because of this technical classification.

Their core grievance: long-standing occupation is being ignored in favour of outdated paper records.

High Court finds “prima facie substance”

After perusing the record, the Bench noted that there appears to be prima facie merit in the petitioners’ case.

The court made a strong observation, calling it a “sad reality” that even premises marked as common bathrooms were permitted to be used and recognised as homes for several years. It further remarked that if such long-term occupation is established, occupants of these premises cannot be treated differently from other residents during redevelopment.

Importantly, the court has not yet decided the issue finally, but has clearly indicated that the petitioners’ claim warrants serious examination.

Court orders site inspection, seeks MHADA’s stand

To ascertain the factual position, the High Court has directed a Court Officer, appointed by the Prothonotary and Senior Master, to visit the premises, verify whether it is being used as a residential unit and submit a report along with photographs.

The inspection is to take place in the presence of MHADA representatives, with the report to be filed before the court ahead of the next hearing on December 22, 2025.

The State government and MHADA have also been asked to file an affidavit clarifying their stand on whether occupants of such tenements are eligible for permanent alternate accommodation.

Till then, the court has categorically ordered that no eviction or coercive steps be taken against the petitioners.

Context: BDD Chawl redevelopment by MHADA

The order comes amid the massive BDD Chawl redevelopment project being undertaken by MHADA, covering three major clusters — Worli, Naigaon and NM Joshi Marg — together comprising over 200 chawl buildings.

The project, one of Mumbai’s largest redevelopment exercises, aims to rehouse thousands of old chawl residents into modern apartment buildings while freeing up valuable land parcels in central Mumbai.

However, the present case highlights a grey area in redevelopment policy: how authorities should treat non-standard or irregular tenements that evolved over decades but were never formally regularised in official layouts.

A brief history of BDD Chawls

Constructed in the 1920s by the Bombay Development Directorate (BDD) during the British era, the BDD Chawls were originally built to house mill workers and low-income residents close to Mumbai’s industrial hubs.

Over the decades, these chawls became deeply entrenched residential communities, often adapting informally to population pressures — including the conversion of storage spaces and common utilities into living quarters.

The current redevelopment is meant to modernise this ageing housing stock, but cases like this underline the social and legal complexities involved when lived reality clashes with planning records.

What lies ahead

While the High Court’s order does not grant permanent rehabilitation yet, it sends a strong signal that technical labels alone cannot override decades of occupation.

The outcome of the site inspection and MHADA’s response could have wider implications, potentially affecting how similar cases are treated across the BDD Chawl redevelopment and other large housing renewal projects in Mumbai.

For now, the petitioners have secured breathing space — and judicial attention — in a process where many fear being left behind.

Also Read: Sneak peak of BDD Worli homes post redevelopment

The post “Bathroom on Paper, Home for 40 Years”: Bombay High Court Steps In to Protect BDD Chawl Family appeared first on Square Feat India.

The approval was issued through Government Resolution dated 28 November 2025, by the Housing Department.

Background: Redevelopment Delayed for Over a Decade

The buildings fall under Cadastral Survey Nos. 1458, 1459, and 1460 in Byculla Division, covering several structures (Building Nos. 13–13A, 13B, 15, 17, 19, 21–23, 31–33, 35–37).

The developer had already completed the structural portion of a ground + 20-storey tower, but for nearly 10 years, the redevelopment remained stuck due to:

• Failure to permanently rehouse tenants
• Failure to pay transit rent for the last three years
• Slow progress of internal works
• Accumulating grievances of tenants/occupants

Aggrieved tenants filed Writ Petition in the Bombay High Court. On 1 October 2025, the Court ordered the State to initiate action under the MHADA Act.

Government Moves to Take Over the Project

Following the Court’s instructions, MHADA submitted a proposal to acquire the property and complete the redevelopment. After reviewing the proposal, the State Government has granted approval for compulsory acquisition of the land parcel measuring 1,532.63 sq. m.

Key Government Conditions

The approval is subject to the following major conditions:

1. Disclosure of Third-Party Rights and Liabilities

The developer must provide full financial disclosures regarding:

• Third-party rights
• Loans from banks/financial institutions
• Any other encumbrances

Final approval will be subject to State review of these documents.

2. Action Against the Erring Developer

The government has directed:

• Blacklisting of the developer
• Filing of criminal proceedings for negligence
• Intimation to relevant departments, including BMC

3. Mandatory Compliance with Housing Department Guidelines

MHADA and the Mumbai Building Repair and Reconstruction Board must obtain additional approvals as per the Housing Department’s guidelines dated 22 August 2023.

The State has also instructed authorities to initiate immediate legal and administrative action to take possession and proceed with redevelopment.

Why This Acquisition Matters

The redevelopment of old and dangerous buildings in Mumbai has been a long-standing challenge. This move reinforces the government’s new amendments to the MHADA Act, empowering authorities to take over stalled and unsafe redevelopment projects and ensure timely rehabilitation of tenants.

With the acquisition approved, MHADA will now move forward to complete the redevelopment and rehouse the long-displaced residents of these Nagpada buildings.

Also Read: MHADA plot in Oshiwara Auctioned for Rs 125 Crore

The post MHADA to Blacklist Developer, Launch Criminal Case in Zohra Mansion Nagpada Redevelopment Mess appeared first on Square Feat India.

In a significant ruling highlighting the importance of functional independence in housing societies, the Bombay High Court has upheld the bifurcation of Balaji Tower Cooperative Housing Society from Shree Ganesh CHS in Nerul, Navi Mumbai.

Justice Amit Borkar observed that although both societies were registered under a single cooperative registration, they were physically and functionally separate — located over a kilometer apart, with distinct entrances, utilities, and finances.

Background: One Registration, Two Plots

Shree Ganesh CHS was registered in 1993 over two CIDCO plots — Plot No. 1 in Sector 28 and Plot No. 8 in Sector 22.
While Plot No.1 has 18 residential and 2 commercial buildings, Plot No.8 comprises 80 flats forming Balaji Tower.

Over time, Balaji Tower residents built and maintained their building independently, secured separate water and electricity connections, and even maintained their own bank accounts and audits.

How the Dispute Arose

Despite functioning independently for years, Balaji Tower remained officially under Shree Ganesh CHS. Members alleged that they weren’t notified about general body meetings and were effectively denied their voting and participation rights.

In 2021, they approached the Joint Registrar under Section 18 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act seeking bifurcation. The Registrar approved the split in 2022, but the order was later overturned on appeal.

The residents then approached the Bombay High Court through Writ Petitions No.1218 and 1228 of 2023.

Court’s Key Findings

The Court noted several crucial factors:

• The two plots were more than one kilometer apart with no connecting internal road.
• Both plots had separate water and electricity connections, property tax assessments, and audits.
• Shree Ganesh CHS never maintained Balaji Tower, nor invited its members to general meetings.
• The residents of Balaji Tower effectively operated as an independent unit for years.

Justice Borkar ruled that the bifurcation merely formalized a long-standing reality.

No CIDCO Permission Required

Opponents argued that CIDCO’s prior approval was necessary since it was the lessor of the land.
However, the Court clarified that Sections 17(2) and 18(5) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act automatically transfer assets and liabilities upon registration of the new society — and do not require any separate permission from CIDCO.

“The law itself operates the transfer by statute,” the judge observed, adding that cooperative law aims to promote welfare and not “forced association.”

Outcome

The Court quashed the 2023 appellate order, restored the Joint Registrar’s 2022 order approving bifurcation, and directed both societies to cooperate in transferring records, accounts, and assets relating to Plot No.8.
A request to stay the judgment was also rejected.

Also Read: Bombay High Court Rules BMC Permission Not Required for Tenantable Repairs

The post One Society for Two Buildings a Kilometer Apart? Bombay HC Backs For Independence appeared first on Square Feat India.

The sale includes 5,285 flats across multiple housing schemes in Thane city and district, Vasai (Palghar district), and 77 residential plots in Oros (Sindhudurg) and Kulgaon-Badlapur.

New Dates for Application and Draw

• Online application deadline: August 28, 2025, 11:59 PM
• Earnest money payment deadline: August 29, 2025, 11:59 PM
• Provisional accepted list published: September 7, 2025, at 6:00 PM
• Objections/claims deadline: September 9, 2025, 6:00 PM
• Final accepted list published: September 16, 2025, at 6:00 PM
• Computerized lottery draw: September 18, 2025, at Dr. Kashinath Ghanekar Natyagriha, Thane

Only applicants who submit all required documents will be considered eligible. All updates will be available on MHADA’s official website: https://housing.mhada.gov.in.

Breakdown of Flats and Plots in the Lottery

The Konkan Board’s online lottery is split into five components:

1. 20% Comprehensive Scheme – 565 flats
2. 15% Integrated Urban Housing Scheme – 3,002 flats
3. MHADA Konkan Board Housing Scheme & scattered flats (as-is condition) – 1,677 flats
4. MHADA Konkan Board Housing Scheme (50% Affordable Housing) – 41 flats
5. Residential plots – 77 plots in Oros and Kulgaon-Badlapur

Help for Applicants

For those facing difficulties in the application process, the Konkan Board has set up a dedicated helpline: 022-69468100.

Chief Officer Revati Gaikar confirmed the extension, adding that the step ensures more interested buyers get a chance to participate.

Also Read: MHADA lottery dates extended

The post MHADA Konkan Board Extends Deadline for 5,285 Flats and 77 Plots Lottery to August 28 appeared first on Square Feat India.

MHADA, known for providing reasonably priced homes across income groups, remains one of the most sought-after agencies for aspiring homeowners in Mumbai. Given the city’s soaring real estate prices, MHADA lotteries often see lakhs of applications for a limited number of flats.

The upcoming lottery will offer homes across four income categories — Economically Weaker Section (EWS), Lower Income Group (LIG), Middle Income Group (MIG), and Higher Income Group (HIG) — ensuring that a wide section of society has the opportunity to secure a home at affordable rates.

For many middle-class and lower-income families, MHADA lotteries represent a rare chance to buy a home in Mumbai, where private market rates often remain out of reach. This announcement is expected to generate significant interest among homebuyers eagerly awaiting their shot at affordable housing.

Further details about the locations, pricing, and application process are likely to be announced by MHADA in the coming months.

Also Read; MHADA Announces New Lottery Date for Mumbai

The post MHADA to Hold Mumbai Lottery for 5,000 Homes appeared first on Square Feat India.