Quick Summary: This case is about the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai sending warnings to people living in Rakhmabai Chawl, saying their homes were built without permission. The court, led by Judge Milind N. Jadhav, decided in favor of the residents, keeping their homes from being torn down.
On March 15, 2025, the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai sent warnings to people living in Rakhmabai Mhatre Chawl, located in Mithanagar, Mulund (East), Mumbai. The warnings said their homes were built without permission according to the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. Residents, including Sudhir Sambhaji Jadhav, got these warnings, which demanded that they either remove or get approval for their homes.
The residents, represented by Mr. Amit Ashok Gharte, argued that their homes had been there since before 1962. They showed proof like ration cards, property tax bills, and electricity bills from the 1980s to prove they had lived there for a long time. The chawl, built by the Mhatre family, had been home to these families for decades.
The case was heard by Judge Milind N. Jadhav. On December 1, 2025, the court told the Municipal Corporation to respond. By December 15, 2025, the Corporation sent in statements but didn't provide clear proof of unauthorized construction.
Judge Jadhav found the Corporation's warnings unclear and without proper reason. He noted that the residents had shown strong proof of their legal right to live there. The court decided that the Corporation's actions seemed to be influenced by outside interests, possibly connected to redevelopment plans.
"The action seems to be influenced by interested parties," observed Judge Jadhav.
On January 5, 2026, the court canceled the temporary orders against the residents and instructed that no forceful action be taken until the legal case finished. This decision protected the homes of the six people involved in the case, including Sudhir Sambhaji Jadhav.
The court's decision ensures that the residents of Rakhmabai Chawl are not forced out of their homes without proper reason. The ruling emphasizes the need for fair treatment and solid proof in such matters, safeguarding the rights of long-time residents.
