Supreme Court Reverses Bombay HCs Order on Century Cotton Textile Mill Land in Worli

M

In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court (SC) has set aside the Bombay High Court’s (HC) March 2022 decision that directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to transfer the title of a prime five-acre plot of land in Worli to Century Textiles and Industries Ltd, controlled by the Aditya Birla Group. This ruling allows the BMC to reclaim possession of the land, originally leased in 1927 for 28 years at a nominal rent of Re 1 per year.

Background of the Case

• Original Lease Purpose: The land was leased under the Bombay Improvement Trust Transfer Act of 1925 to provide 476 dwelling units and 10 shops for economically weaker sections.
• Lease Expiry: Although the lease expired decades ago, no action was taken to repossess the land until now.
• Company's Actions: Century Textiles submitted plans in 2009 to repurpose the land for commercial use, deviating from the original welfare-oriented purpose.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The SC bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Prasanna B Varale, highlighted several critical points in their judgment:

1. Purpose of Lease: The land was explicitly intended to serve the welfare of the "poorer classes" by providing affordable housing.
2. Commercial Exploitation: The company’s attempts to use the property for commercial purposes contradicted the original lease agreement, undermining the statutory framework’s intent.
3. Public Welfare vs. Private Profit: The SC emphasized that such deviations would transform a public welfare scheme into an instrument for private gain, betraying the public trust and the legislative intent.

Key Rulings by the Supreme Court

1. No Obligation for Conveyance: The SC ruled that neither the statutory framework nor the lease terms obligated the BMC to transfer ownership of the land to Century Textiles.
2. Status Quo Maintained: The court reaffirmed the original intent of the lease to benefit economically vulnerable sections, preventing the misuse of public welfare schemes for commercial exploitation.
3. Protection of Public Interest: The judgment reiterated that the land must remain dedicated to addressing housing inadequacies in Mumbai and improving urban living conditions for the underserved.

Implications of the Judgment

• For BMC: The ruling empowers the BMC to take possession of the land and redirect its use to fulfill the original purpose of providing housing for economically weaker sections.
• For Developers: The judgment serves as a stern warning against the misuse of public welfare policies and underscores the need for strict compliance with statutory obligations.
• For Housing Policy: The decision reinforces the importance of safeguarding public welfare schemes and preventing their distortion for private profit.

We must never confuse elegance with snobbery