RELATED
MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Friday issued a notice to the ministry of environment and forests (MoEF) on a public interest litigation (PIL) that has questioned the validity of conditions imposed on slum rehabilitation schemes in Coastal regulation Zone (CRZ) areas.
Arguing a petition filed by Arun Gaikwad, advocate Aditya Pratap submitted in court that the redevelopment of slums in Mumbai under theSlum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) Schemes had come to a halt for over two dedaces in CRZ areas.
The reason, said Pratap, was "an iniquitous law governing the redevelopment of slums in CRZ-2 areas.'' While skyscrapers have come up in these areas, slums continue to languish, he said before a bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice M S Sanklecha. The bench then issued notice to Moef, Maharashtra environment department, SRA andMaharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority and posted the matter for further hearing to March 18.
The PIL challenged as discriminatory, a clause in the CRZ Notification, 2011, which stipulates that the redevelopment of slums in the Coastal Regulation Zone areas of Mumbai shall be done only in joint venture with a government department which has to hold a minimum of 51% investment in the project. This stipulation is not there for any other redevelopment project in CRZ areas, including tenanted buildings.
According to a PIL questioning the validity of conditions imposed on slum rehabilitation schemes in Coastal Regulation Zones (CRZs), the petitioner's advocate argued that while skyscrapers have come up in these areas, slums continue to languish, with their redevelopment having been brought to a halt for over two decades in such regions
Arguing a petition filed by Arun Gaikwad, advocate Aditya Pratap submitted in court that the redevelopment of slums in Mumbai under theSlum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) Schemes had come to a halt for over two dedaces in CRZ areas.
The reason, said Pratap, was "an iniquitous law governing the redevelopment of slums in CRZ-2 areas.'' While skyscrapers have come up in these areas, slums continue to languish, he said before a bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice M S Sanklecha. The bench then issued notice to Moef, Maharashtra environment department, SRA andMaharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority and posted the matter for further hearing to March 18.
The PIL challenged as discriminatory, a clause in the CRZ Notification, 2011, which stipulates that the redevelopment of slums in the Coastal Regulation Zone areas of Mumbai shall be done only in joint venture with a government department which has to hold a minimum of 51% investment in the project. This stipulation is not there for any other redevelopment project in CRZ areas, including tenanted buildings.
According to a PIL questioning the validity of conditions imposed on slum rehabilitation schemes in Coastal Regulation Zones (CRZs), the petitioner's advocate argued that while skyscrapers have come up in these areas, slums continue to languish, with their redevelopment having been brought to a halt for over two decades in such regions
