After Supreme Court snub, activist to file case against Hiranandani

Former IPS officer and lawyer Y.P. Singh, representing social activist Medha Patkar, said on Friday that they would now file a criminal complaint against builder Niranjan Hiranandani and other government officials with the Economic Offences Wing. 


Mr Singh announced this after the Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain Hiranandani’s plea against the Bombay high court order restraining it from carrying out any further development in its Powai township without providing flats for the weaker section of the society.

“The entire 240 acres of land at Powai was meant for mass housing, with half the flats at 430 square feet and the other half at 860 square feet. Despite the stipulation being clear and specific, the public servants, mainly from the MMRDA, BMC and Mantralaya, connived with the builder one after another to build palatial flats instead,” Mr Singh said. He added that they would demand that the existing buildings be demolished, as they were constructed in violation of norms.

Hiranandani township resident Rahila, a marketing professional, said the residents should not be penalised for the builder’s violations. “What were the authorities doing when all this happened? They were the ones who granted all the permissions, so why should we be penalised?” she said.

Meanwhile, Mukul Rohatgi, Hiranandani’s lawyer, said, they would move the high court again. “We will show the HC that we have committed no breach of the tripartite agreement.”

Supreme Court takes Hiranandani to task

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to dilute the Bombay high court order that stopped Hiranandani Developers from carrying out further construction at its Powai township without first providing affordable housing.

Abench of Justices H L Dattu and C K Prasad was severe in its criticism of the developers for blatantly breaching a 1986 agreement with the state government and the MMRDA by which the group was allowed to develop 230 acres of land in Powai to construct affordable houses and hand over part of them to the state at cheap rates.

"We feel so sorry that private land was purchased by the government and given to you for development. That place was meant for below middle class people. But you built palaces for those who can afford Bentleys and Ferraris," the bench said.

In 1986, the state passed an award determining the compensation at the rate of Re 1 per hectare for the lands acquired from landholders. In return, the Hiranandanis were to construct affordable flats-half of 431 sq ft (40 sq m) and the rest of 861 sq ft (80 sq m). Beyond this, 15% of the flats were to be given to the state at Rs 135 per sq ft.

The palatial houses built by Hiranandani Developers in Powai in violation of the agreement with the state government had prompted the Bombay high court to pass an order on February 22, directing the developer to stop all construction activity on the remaining plots under the Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS) and specify the vacancy position before the court. The HC order came in the wake of a public interest litigation filed by a group of social activists led by Medha Patkar, and two local residents.

The high court had directed the Hiranandanis to construct around 3,100 affordable houses-1 ,593 flats of around 861 sq ft (80 sq m) and 1,511 flats of 430 sq ft (40 sq m). Around 450 apartments from this lot, the court said, have to be offered to the state at a rate of Rs 135 per sq ft, which the government can then sell to its employees. Once these instructions have been complied with, the court said, the developer would have to take its permission and only then can it can embark on making further construction on the remaining land. The could had also allowed the petitioners to file criminal cases against the builder and "errant" government officers.

The Supreme Court bench on Friday asked senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Gopal Subramanaim, "As it is, middle class people in Mumbai are residing on roads. Can they afford even a square inch of land?"

When Rohatgi attempted to justify the developer's action by referring to the buildings and hospital built by them as part of PADS, the bench said, "The quality of houses is bound to be the best as it is for those people who can afford Bentleys and Ferraris . What we see is palaces-... Can you show us if you have built even a single house of 40 or 80 square metre?"

MMRDA counsel Shekhar Naphade informed the bench that "there has been rampant collusion between the officials of MMRDA and the developer in how the agreement was breached."Though the court permitted the Hiranandanis to withdraw their appeal and pursue options before the Bombay high court, the court did not mince words and said, "It is all an eyewash. What are we doing in this country.... Do we encourage only a set of people in this country. Do other persons not have a right too?"

SC setback for Hiranandani; fate of 9,000 rests with HC

In a major setback to Hiranandani Developers, the Supreme Court (SC) on Friday refused to entertain its plea against a February 22 Bombay high court (HC) interim order that restrained it from carrying out further development in its Powai township before constructing affordable homes. The SC decision will have serious repercussions on Hiranandani’s 230-acre housing project in Powai if implemented retrospectively as it will decide the fate of over 9,000 people staying in the locality.

However, everything hinges on the final HC order on April 19. During the hearing of a PIL filed by activist Medha Patkar, the HC will get a report from the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) with whom the developer signed an agreement in 1986 to develop 92.93 hectares of land under the Powai Area Development Scheme and build small, affordable flats for low-income groups.

Advocate YP Singh, who represents Patkar in court, said all 92.93 hectares of land in Powai was meant to construct mass houses for lower and middle income groups. However, a majority of the area has been developed by building palatial residential homes and commercial complexes.

“The court order should be implemented retrospectively even though residential and commercial complexes were sold to people. It is the responsibility of the developer to compensate them. BMC and MMRDA officials are equally responsible because they are hand-in-glove with the developer for the past 28 years. Poor people lost affordable houses because of them and it resulted in a rise in property prices,” said Singh.

Real estate experts said if the interim order becomes the final directive, it will be a cause of concern as over 9,000 people have houses and commercial places in the area developed by Hiranandani in Powai.

“I don’t think there will be any change in the area already constructed and developed. The developer has constructed huge hotels and several commercial and residential complexes. 

It is very difficult to evict them at this juncture. The authority has not yet taken a decision on demolishing illegal houses in Ulhasnagar. They cannot even evict slum dwellers, so it is difficult to evict people who have bought luxury houses with their hard-earned money. The matter may get resolved by charging a heavy penalty, but nothing is clear at this moment,” said a real estate expert requesting anonymity. Hiranandani Developers managing director Niranjan Hiranandani refused to comment saying the matter is sub-judiced.

Hiranandani withdraws plea in SC on Powai land issue

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain Hiranandani Developers’ plea against the Bombay high court order, which restrains it from carrying out any further development activity in Powai until it provides flats for the weaker sections of the society. The real estate firm is behind the development of the upmarket township in Powai, which has made the suburb a plush residential-cum-shopping hub.

A bench of justices HL Dattu and Chandramauli K Prasad said it cannot interfere with the February 22 high court order and prompted the developer to withdraw its plea.

The high court order had stated that the development of the Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS) on 230 acres of land was meant for affordable houses of 400 and 800 square feet, as per the agreement among the state government, the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority and the original landowners.

Apart from forbidding further construction, the high court had also directed the MMRDA to prepare a statement detailing the total construction done in PADS, the balance open land under the scheme, the number and area of tenements constructed and a list of purchasers. It has posted the matter for further hearing on April 19.

According to the high court order, the developer will require to construct 1,511 tenements admeasuring 400 square sq ft and 1,593 of 800 sq ft tenements and sell them to the state government at a concessional rate of Rs. 135 per sq ft.

The directives were issued on public interest litigations filed by social activist Medha Patkar and city residents Kamlakar Satve and Rajendra Thacker, seeking resumption of 240 acres of land in Powai and Tirandaz villages, which were taken over by the MMRDA for providing affordable housing.

The petitioners alleged that it was a complete breach of the agreement executed on November 19, 1986.

The developer blatantly breached conditions in the agreement and state and MMRDa officials turned a blind eye towards the violations. The petitioners had sought the prosecution of the government officials for negligence, but the court had refused to direct authorities to initiate criminal proceedings against the concerned.

It has, however, granted the petitioners the liberty to lodge criminal complaints against those concerned.

On Friday, YP Singh, Medha Patkar’s counsel, said the petitioners are planning to file criminal complaints in accordance with the liberty granted to them.

Hiranandani may raze parts of its buildings in Mumbai

Hiranandani Developers may have to demolish some of their existing structures in order to build low-cost housing in the Powai Area Development Scheme (PADS) within their Powai township.

The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) had filed a report in the Bombay high court stating that nearly 1.13 lakh square metres of buildable area in the Powai township qualifies for low-cost housing.

As per the February 22 order of the HC, Hiranandani has to first construct 1,511 flats of 40 square metres and 1,593 flats of 80 square metres without amalgamating any flats before undertaking any other construction work in the township.

But according to the developer, the 1.13 lakh square metre area is not sufficient to construct 3,104 flats. Aspi Chinoy, legal counsel for Hiranandani, informed the court that they are willing to demolish some of the construction that has come up to plinth level. “There are around 8-9 buildings which have been constructed up to the plinth level. Also, there are certain plots for which only construction plans have been sanctioned. We are willing to demolish the plinth level structures and resubmit plans for the40 sq m and 80sq m flats,” said Chinoy.

A division bench of chief justice Mohit Shah and justice Roshan Dalvi has asked the Hiranandanis to submit the plans for the low-cost housing project within two weeks. The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) has been asked to consider the same expeditiously.

The high court has clarified that Hiranandani can go ahead with the construction of the low-cost housing if the BMC and the authorities concerned grant it an Intimation Of Disapproval (IOD) or a Commencement Certificate.

Submitting a report, Chinoy said that 80 buildings have been constructed completely. Commercial premises occupy 1.19 lakh sq m of the total area in the township.

Chinoy sought clarification whether they would be getting an exemption on 15% of these flats, which could be used for commercial purposes. Kiran Bagalia, advocate for the MMRDA, pointed put to the court that as per their tripartite agreement, there was no such clause.

Earlier, the HC had restrained development while hearing a public interest litigation filed by noted social activist Medha Patkar and city residents Kamlakar Satve and Rajendra Thackar. The HC has kept the PILs for hearing on June 21.