The Supreme Court has mandated the Bombay High Court to conduct a thorough performance audit of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971. This directive comes against the backdrop of over 1,600 pending cases in the high court, highlighting the legislative gridlock that hampers effective slum redevelopment efforts across the state.

The Supreme Court has urged the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court to form a bench that will initiate suo motu proceedings to evaluate the challenges associated with the implementation of the 1971 Act. This initiative aims to pinpoint obstacles hindering the enforcement of legislation designed to enhance living conditions for economically disadvantaged communities. A bench led by Justices PS Narasimha and Aravind Kumar has underscored the constitutional responsibility of the executive branch to ensure the effective implementation of statutes. They emphasised that continuous monitoring and real-time assessment of the law’s impact are essential for upholding the Rule of Law. The judiciary’s role, as stated in the judgement, is to facilitate justice without infringing upon the functions of the executive and legislative branches. This directive followed the dismissal of an appeal by Yash Developers, whose slum redevelopment project in Borivali, Mumbai, was cancelled after being stalled for over two decades.

The Supreme Court not only rejected the developer’s plea but also imposed a cost of ₹1 lakh, to be paid to the Supreme Court Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee. Justice Narasimha’s detailed 43-page judgement spotlighted the inefficiencies surrounding the Act’s implementation, echoing frustrations previously expressed by the high court. Data from the National Judicial Data Grid indicates a staggering 1,612 pending cases related to the Act in the high court, with 135 cases lingering for over a decade. Despite 4,488 cases being filed and resolved in the last 20 years, a substantial backlog persists. The judgement reiterated the Act’s intention to provide basic housing—a fundamental element of human dignity. However, the tendency for litigation arising from the statute points to deeper issues within the legislative framework. Complications in land identification and declarations as slums, coupled with potentially biased interventions by builders, have contributed to these challenges. Notably, the Supreme Court highlighted that these persistent issues should have prompted a proactive review by the Maharashtra government.

The executive branch has a constitutional duty to evaluate whether the statute’s objectives are being achieved. The performance audit, as ordered by the court, is crucial to ensure the Act serves its intended beneficiaries—the marginalised and impoverished, who often lack the resources to advocate for legislative reforms. As the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act seeks to uplift underprivileged communities, rigorous oversight is imperative to meet its objectives. The Supreme Court’s call for a performance audit represents a significant step towards rectifying systemic flaws and enhancing the effectiveness of slum redevelopment initiatives in Maharashtra, thereby ensuring that these efforts align with sustainable urban development goals.