0% found this document useful (0 votes)
280 views7 pagesSRA vs. Ms. Amogh Enterprises
The Slum Rehabilitation Authority has terminated the appointment of M/s. Amogh Enterprises as the developer for the Shiv Shakti CHS (Prop) project due to 18 years of non-performance and delays in implementation. The society is now permitted to appoint a new developer of their choice to proceed with the slum rehabilitation scheme. This decision follows a public notice and a court ruling that highlighted the need for timely action in slum redevelopment efforts.
Uploaded by
tradebull0010Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
280 views7 pagesSRA vs. Ms. Amogh Enterprises
The Slum Rehabilitation Authority has terminated the appointment of M/s. Amogh Enterprises as the developer for the Shiv Shakti CHS (Prop) project due to 18 years of non-performance and delays in implementation. The society is now permitted to appoint a new developer of their choice to proceed with the slum rehabilitation scheme. This decision follows a public notice and a court ruling that highlighted the need for timely action in slum redevelopment efforts.
Uploaded by
tradebull0010Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
/ 7
ha.
2444
SLUM REHABILITATION AUTHORITY, BRIHANMUMBAI
BEFORE THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
SLUM REHABILITATION AUTHORITY,
BRIHANMUMBAL
File No. SRA/RC/MHL/0012
Slum Rehabilitation Authority .. Applicant
Vis
1. M/s. Amogh Enterprises
C-704/705, Sahyadri Sadguru Nagar, Devipada,
Borivali (E),
Mumbai-400 066.
2. Shri, Sanjay Sharad Neve
of MIs, Sanjay Neve & Associates,
302, Omkareshwar, Linking Road,
Behind Kanderpada Talav, Dahisar (West)
Mumbai- 68.
3. Shiv Shakti CHS (Prop)
CTS No.215(pt), Navrang Novelty Stores,
Hanuman Chal (Main Road), Devipada
Village Magathane, Borivali (East)
Mumbai-400 066. ++» Respondents
ORDER UNDER SECTION 13) OF MAHARASHTRA SLUM AREAS
(IMPROVEMENT, CLEARANCE & REDEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1971,
(Passed on: 19 MAR 025
1. This proceeding under Section 13(2) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (ILC. & R.)
Act, 1971 is initiated in respect of Slum Rehabilitation Scheme on plot of land bearing
CTS No.215(pt) of Village Magathane, Taluka Borivali for “Shiv Shakti CHS (Prop)”
pursuant to note dated 29.11.2023 of the Engineering Department/SRA. In brief the facts
Which lead to the present proceedings are as under;
SRA/RC/MHL/0012 ce 1
Got sonant Kanckar Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai -400 051,
6912 5800 « Fax : 022-2659 0487 » Fn: sra.gov.in in Br
2. The slum dwellers residing on plot of land bearing CTS No.215(pt) of Village
Magathane, Taluka Borivali formed the Society “Shiv Shakti CHS (Prop)” and resolved
‘o redevelop the land in their occupation by implementing the S, R. Scheme. Accordingly,
the Respondent No.3 Society appointed Respondent No.1 as Developer for
by Slum Rehabilitation Authority on 07.09.2006. ‘Thereafter, no
Permissions/approvals are granted in the subject S. R. Scheme, KM
3. The Note of Engineering Department/SRA dated 29.11.2023 is on record. T 1c.
Slum Rehabilitation Authority has recorded 517 dormant proposals through Public weak
dated 20.04.2022 in which the Developers and Societies have failed to take necessary steps
'n said list of $17 Schemes, the subject S. R. Scheme is at Sr. No. 449. The said Public
Notice dated 20.04.2022 is set aside by Hon'ble High Court through order dated
10.01.2023 in Writ Petition (L) No.14017 of 2022, Nipun Thakkar V/s. Chief Executive
Officer/SRA & Anr,
Hearing:
4. Pursuant to the said order of Hon'ble High Court, in respect of subject $.R. Scheme
the notices were issued for hearing to all concered patties and thereafter matter is finally
heard on 21.01.2025,
5 On that day Advocate Kailash Pathak along with representatives ofthe Society ie
Shri. Sambhaji Kadam, Shri. Baban Dalvi, Shri. Chandrakant Parab remained present,
None present on behalf of Respondent No.1 Developer and Respondent No.2 Architect
After hearing the matter was closed for order,
SRA/RCI/MEL/0012 et
ee
Arguments of Respondent No.3 So: Ly:
§ _ Itis submitted that since year 2007, there is no progtess in the subject 8, R. Scheme
and other 6 to 7 projects of the Respondent No.1 Developer are already stalled, List of the
Said projects is submitted on the record before this Authority,
7. The Respondent Developer M/s. Amogh Enterprises was appointed as a Developer
in the subject scheme in year 2006 and since last 18 years the Respondent Developer has
not done any work in the subject scheme.
Jn view of the same, the Respondent No.3 Society prayed to terminate the
appointment of Respondent No.1 Developer for implementation of subject 8. R, Scheme
and further prayed to appoint new Developer M/s Jangid Construction Pvt Lid. for
implementation of subjeot S. R. Scheme,
Issues and Discussion:
Assues and Discussion:
8 From the documentary evidence and oral arguments, the main issues arises for
determination of this Authority in the present matter are:
|. ] Whether there is non-perforinance on the part of Respondent No. Yes
2- | Whether the delay in implementation of subject .R. Scheme is aibutable o ‘Yes
[Respondent No.
3+ | Whether the Respondent No.1 has financial viability to implement the scheme| No
jand bonafide intention to complete the subject $.R. Scheme.
4. | What order? AS per final order.
Tt appears from the record that the subject §, R. Scheme was accepted by SRA on
(7-09.2006, Thereafter the Respondent No.l Developer failed to obtain further
Permissions/approvals in the subject 8. R. Scheme. The scheme could not proceed further
within expected time,
Considering the same, there is non-performance as well as there is inordinate delay
on the part of Respondent No.1 Developer in implementing the subject $. R. Scheme.
SRA/RC/MHL/0012 3
Iw,
ofa’ RA the subject S. R. Scheme.
Conclusion;
9. From the record it appears that, the slum dwellers residing on plot of land bearing
CTS No.215(pt) of Village Magathane, Taluka Borivali formed the Society “Shiv Shakti
CHS (Prop)” and appointed Respondent No.1 as Developer for implementation of subject
plot of land under Regulation 33(10) of DCR 1991 on subject plot of land and same was
accepted by SRA on 07.09.2006, Thereafter, no further permissions/approvals are rane eR
in the subject S. R. Scheme. EE
10. Itappears from the record that the Respondent No.1 Developer has not taken fut
‘approvals since acceptance ofthe scheme in the year 2006 and the scheme is at stand still
since then. Gas
