Bombay High Court

RAKESH HASMUKH GOYANIversusCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (SRA) AND 3 ORS

Decided: 7 July 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: M S KARNIK S M MODAK

Holding

The petition was disposed, directing the petitioner to apply to the SRA within two weeks and the SRA to allot a suitable tenement in accordance with its policy.

Summary

The petitioner, Rakesh Hasmukh Goyani, filed a writ petition claiming entitlement to an alternate rehabilitation tenement under a Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) scheme, alleging that no tenements were being allotted to him. The respondents, including the Chief Executive Officer of SRA, contended that all tenements in the scheme were already allotted but offered the petitioner a tenement in another scheme, subject to payment of the difference calculated on the Ready Reckoner Rate as per an office order dated 20.03.2025. The petitioner was advised to submit an application to the SRA within two weeks, agreeing to pay the stipulated difference, after which the SRA would allocate a suitable tenement within eight weeks. The court, after hearing counsel, disposed of the petition, effectively directing the petitioner to follow the procedural steps outlined by the SRA. No substantive order on entitlement was made beyond the disposal of the petition.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is legally entitled to an alternate rehabilitation tenement under the SRA scheme.
Whether the SRA can condition allotment of a tenement on payment of the difference based on the Ready Reckoner Rate.
Whether the petitioner must apply to the SRA within a specified period to obtain the tenement.

Subjects

Slum Rehabilitation Authority
tenement allotment
Ready Reckoner Rate
rehabilitation premises
procedural compliance

Judgment

                                                                                        19-wp 3626-22.doc

                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ARJUN                                    ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
MACHHINDRA
KADAM
                                              WRIT PETITION NO. 3626 OF 2022
Digitally signed by
ARJUN
MACHHINDRA
KADAM
Date: 2026.07.07
18:00:11 +0530
                      Rakesh Hasmukh Goyani                                            … Petitioner
                              Versus
                      Chief Executive Officer (SRA) & Ors.                             ... Respondents

                                                 __________________________

                      Mr. Deepak Pandey for the Petitioner.
                      Mr. R. P. Ojha for Respondent No.4.
                      Mr. Abhijit P. Kulkarni a/w. Ms. Sweta Shah for Respondent Nos.1 & 2-SRA.
                                               __________________________

                                                          CORAM         : M. S. KARNIK AND
                                                                          S. M. MODAK, JJ.
                                                          DATED         : 7th JULY, 2026.

                      P.C. :

                      1.       Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

                      2.       The petitioner’s grievance is that he has not been allotted a tenement

                      though he is legally entitled to such alternate rehab premises.                    In

                      paragraph No.6 of the Affidavit-in-Reply filed on behalf of respondent

                      Nos.1 and 2-SRA, it is stated thus:-

                               “6.     I say that the all Tenements in this Scheme have already
                               been allotted and no Tenements are available for allotment, but in
                               this Scenario the petitioner can be given PAP tenement in any other
                               scheme of his choice as per list of available PAPs with SRA. In view
                               of the Office Order dated 20.03.2025, the Slum Rehabilitation
                               Authority shall calculate the valuation of the SRA’s society Tenement
                               in which the petitioner is seeking a PAP Tenement. If the valuation


                       Amk                                                                         1/2
                                                             19-wp 3626-22.doc

       of the PAP Tenement, based on the Ready Reckoner Rate, is higher
       than that of the Petitioner’s SRA’s Society Tenement, and if the
       Petitioner agrees to pay the difference amount as calculated
       according to the Ready Reckoner Rate for the available PAP
       tenements, then the Petitioner’s application may be considered in
       accordance with law. Hereto annexed Exhibit “D” is a copy of the
       office Order dated 20.03.2025.”


3.     In such view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner says

that an appropriate application shall be made to the SRA within a period of

two weeks from today. On such an application is made, the SRA in terms

of paragraph No.6 shall allot a suitable tenement to the petitioner. Since

the petitioner is agreeable to pay the difference amount as per the Ready

Reckoner Rate, there should be no difficulty in completing the process of

allotment which we expect the same to be done within a period of eight

weeks from the date of the application including the handing over the

tenement.

4.     The petition is disposed of.



(S. M. MODAK, J.)                                         (M. S. KARNIK, J.)




 Amk                                                                   2/2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.