Bombay HC Greenlights State-Adani Plan for Dharavi
By Nandini Rao
In a judgment that cuts through the fog of speculative activism and reaffirms the primacy of policy-backed executive action, the Bombay High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the transfer of salt pan lands in Mumbai’s eastern suburbs to the Maharashtra government for rehabilitation housing under the Dharavi Redevelopment Project.
The PIL, filed by activist-lawyer Sagar Devre, targeted the government’s decision to hand over nearly 255 acres of land in Mulund, Bhandup, and Vikhroli—salt pan tracts historically perceived as ecologically sensitive—for onward use by Adani Realty. The land, earmarked for rental housing of Project Affected Persons (PAPs), had sparked allegations of environmental violation and preferential treatment. However, the court was unambiguous in its stance: There was no illegality, no procedural deviation, and certainly no ground for judicial interference.
 |
| The Bombay High Court held that there was no illegality, no procedural deviation, and certainly no ground for judicial interference. |
The heart of Devre’s argument lay in the claim that these salt pan lands fell within wetland and CRZ categories, protected under a 2012 memorandum issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, which ostensibly barred their repurposing. Yet, in a move that altered the legal landscape, the Union Ministry of Commerce and Industry issued a fresh Office Memorandum in August 2024. This updated policy expressly permitted the use of salt pan lands for slum rehabilitation, affordable housing, and PAP resettlement—effectively nullifying the basis of Devre’s challenge.
Representing the Centre, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh clarified that the land transfer had occurred within the framework of this revised policy and in accordance with all applicable environmental guidelines. Crucially, the lands in question no longer qualified as wetlands under the Wetland (Conservation and Management) Rules, 2017—a classification the petitioner failed to contest.
This omission proved fatal. The court underscored that judicial intervention cannot be summoned on the basis of apprehension alone. “Mere allegations, devoid of evidence or grounded illegality, cannot be permitted to stall projects conceived in public interest,” noted the Bench.
Significantly, the verdict underscores the judiciary’s evolving posture in matters of public infrastructure and mass resettlement. It draws a critical distinction between ideological resistance and legally actionable grievance. The rehabilitation of over a million residents from Dharavi—arguably Asia’s most high-profile slum—necessitates land parcels on an unprecedented scale. The salt pan lands in question, contiguous and available, present a rare logistical opportunity. That they have been handed to a private developer—Adani Realty—may raise eyebrows, but as far as the court is concerned, no law has been breached.
This ruling, in effect, clears the legal decks for the state to proceed with one of India’s most ambitious urban renewal initiatives. It also delivers a stern reminder: While activism has its place, it must be rooted in law, not conjecture; in substance, not sentiment. For now, the court has thrown its weight behind pragmatism, holding that policy-backed rehabilitation—when lawfully executed—cannot be derailed by vague fears of ecological disruption or corporate cronyism.
Whether Devre escalates the matter to the Supreme Court remains to be seen. But on this count, the Bombay High Court has made its position abundantly clear: In a city gasping for space and dignity in housing, legally reclassified salt pans may well hold the key to unlocking humane rehabilitation. And the law, for now, stands firmly on the side of implementation.
To receive regular updates and notifications, follow The Draft News:
