No slum dwellers' consent needed for 64 redevelopment projects on our land: BMC

Hindustan Times

11-06-2025

MUMBAI: Following the Dharavi model, the BMC has announced that the consent of slum dwellers will not be needed for the redevelopment of 64 slum plots on BMC land. Effectively, this smoothens the road for developers interested in redeveloping the slum pockets after the Maharashtra government in March handed over the responsibility of their development to the civic body.
The projects will unfold as per the usual model established by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), under the provisions of 33(10) of the Development Control and Promotion Regulation (DCPR), 2034, except with the BMC as the implementing authority, said an official from the BMC's estate department. The cut-off date for eligibility and home sizes offered to eligible dwellers will also be as per SRA rules. On May 10, BMC opened the gates for developers to express their interest in developing the plots.
The majority of the 64 plots lie in the western and eastern suburbs, with most falling in Govandi followed by Malad East. In total, the BMC is seeking to develop around 400,000 square metres of slum land in the city.
On Tuesday, the civic body released a supplementary document and also extended the date for developers to submit bids till June 25. The bids will be opened on that very day, and technical scrutiny will begin.
The BMC made the lack of consent clear in response to clarifications raised in pre-bid consultations by interested developers, saying, 'As the BMC is the landowner, slum dweller consent is not required for redevelopment as per the provisions of Regulation 33(10), VI-1.15 of DCPR 2034.' Slum redevelopment projects typically require a majority consent from residents, but the DCPR makes an exception to the rule.
'While there is the question of carrying out slum redevelopment in a democratic manner, there is no doubt here that the BMC has administrative authority over municipal land and is empowered to initiate action for the removal of unauthorised structures and the eviction of their occupants, following due process,' explained Dhaval Parsana, principal architect at Project Maitree, which works in the field of redevelopment. In this way, at least the eligible slum dwellers are promised housing. Redevelopment may happen at a quicker pace than the prevailing practice, as there will be little scope of LOI (letter of intent) issues on the basis of their consent forms being traded from one developer to another for years on end, often jeopardising their chances of a home.
When asked if this was a way to lead to the promised slum-free Mumbai, Parsana did not hold his breath. 'A slum-free city is a distant dream that will take a long time to reach,' he said. 'To eradicate slums, Mumbai needs an affordable rental market that provides an alternative to people coming into the city. It is likely that those deemed ineligible in these slum redevelopment projects will revert to slum homes in other areas if left with no affordable alternative.'
Govandi, the area with the most slums in the city and the one that stands to be affected the most, has its roots in forceful evictions conducted when the suburbs of Bandra, Juhu and Andheri had begun being developed.
'This is a classic case of exclusion. You cannot make decisions affecting thousands of families on public land without consulting them. It's against the principles of democracy and natural justice,' said a vehement Faiyaz Alam, president of the Govandi-based NGO New Sangam Welfare Forum, who shot off a letter to the Maharashtra CM, BMC and other authorities. 'No community consultations, surveys or official notices have been issued to inform or involve residents in the decision-making process. The people are not going to be against redevelopment as it will only improve their area, but the process needs to be transparent so that they have the space and time to raise their concerns beforehand. The decisions cannot be made between the builder and BMC alone when it is the residents that stand to be affected.'
Parsana questioned what the BMC was offering in these projects to make it lucrative for developers to undertake the whole exercise: from surveying the site, communicating with the slum dwellers, preparing the annexures, providing them with rehabilitation homes, and providing additional housing to the BMC to get the edge over other developers.
After the developers are chosen, they will have to communicate with the residents on the project plan and survey them to create an annexure of eligible residents. The civic body has said it will assist in carrying out any necessary evictions.