mid-day did a reality check of structures on list released on Wednesday and found many that had been fully repaired were still marked dilapidated. Some buildings that had previously received C-1 notices — indicating that they were unsafe for habitation were repaired in recent months. Despite this, these structures appear on MHADA list
The Kalyan Building on Khadilkar Road in Girgaon. The structure has been issued an eviction notice, but its residents claim it was recently repaired. Pics/Atul Kamble
The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) released a fresh list of dilapidated buildings on Wednesday evening. While the intent behind the move is to avert tragedy during the monsoon season, a ground check by mid-day has brought to light discrepancies and ambiguities in the list, which have sparked confusion among citizens.
Some buildings that had previously received C-1 notices — indicating that they were unsafe for habitation — were repaired in recent months. Despite this, these structures appear on MHADA’s latest list of dilapidated buildings, residents have claimed. Aparna Malar, owner of the Kalyan Building in Girgaon, one of the buildings on the list, told mid-day, “At the beginning of March, we received a notice stating that our building falls in the C-1 category, meaning major and minor repairs are necessary to make the building safe for habitation.”
Nirmala Jain, owner, Vishnu Nivas
She added, “Towards the end of March, MHADA officials conducted audits, after which we received another notice in which it was mentioned that if we did not conduct repair works immediately, we would have to evacuate the building. The manager that we have appointed for the upkeep of the building, thus, took all tenants’ consent for the repairs to be done and submitted it to MHADA, whose authorities gave their approval. We do not know why our building is on the list when we have already carried out all the suggested repairs, along with plastering on the outside.”
Asked if they have received a post-repair structural audit certificate, the owner stated that she did not have any information about that. “Our building manager has informed us that all the paperwork is clear and we do not need to undergo redevelopment,” said Malar.
The Kalyan Building on Khadilkar Road in Girgaon. The structure has been issued an eviction notice, but its residents claim it was recently repaired. Pics/Atul Kamble
Residents flummoxed
Some residents are unsure about what steps to take after notices were unexpectedly put up on their buildings. “We just found a notice pasted on our door. There has been no official communication or sharing of inspection details. We don’t know whether to vacate or challenge it. We also do not know the process in terms of whether we will get any compensation, etc. The person who has his office downstairs also received the same notice. He is into construction. We have planned to take his help to navigate this matter. As of now, it’s just us who live here, and he runs his office. Some of our tenants have passed away, and some have already left long ago,” said Nirmala Jain, owner of Vishnu Nivas, another Girgaon building on the list.
Legal quagmire
The situation is also complicated for residents who are willing to opt for redevelopment but are held back due to legal and bureaucratic hurdles. Title clearance issues, ownership disputes, and lack of developer interest continue to stall redevelopment plans, even for those eager to move out of unsafe structures.
Bipin Panchal, owner, Mancharam Nivas building in Girgaon
“We have approached nearly four to five developers since the first notice was put up some six months ago. However, since there is an issue with title clearance, all developers mentioned that they would take up the project only once we have a clear title. We also approached the collector’s office, where they made us run from one department to the other. Another hurdle is that we have received this property through inheritance, and, thus, my cousin who lives in the US needs to be here to get the title clearance work done. And he comes here just once a year, which is further delaying the process. At present, there are three families living as tenants. They are ready to vacate the houses in case we undergo redevelopment, but these legal hurdles are making it a Herculean task for us. We hope nothing adverse happens this monsoon season. We are stuck in a situation where we cannot leave this building just like that, and living here has become a risky affair,” said Bipin Panchal, owner of Mancharam Nivas, Shenvi Wadi, Girgaon.
Missing buildings
mid-day has found that several buildings that had previously been served eviction notices are missing from MHADA’s final list, raising questions about the criteria used in compiling the list and the transparency of the process. Lalbaug’s Narayan Ashram Building 6 and Tejukaya are two such buildings. While an eviction notice was served to the former in April this year, the latter’s residents were asked to vacate their houses in January.
Official Speak
The authority confirmed that it has not received any applications, neither under 79(A) nor under 79(B) [see box] for redevelopment of the 96 buildings that were declared dangerous for habitation on Wednesday. For cases where 79(A) and 79(B) deadlines have elapsed, “MHADA will proceed with acquisition of the buildings under Section 79A(1C) of the MHADA Act (as amended). This action ensures that redevelopment can move forward even when there is no cooperation or proposal from the occupants or landlords,” said a MHADA official.
Regarding the C-1 category buildings’ situation, MHADA officials said, “When a building receives a C-1 category notice, MHADA sometimes grants permission for limited repairs. This is particularly allowed if there are unutilised funds available under the PCL- 4000. These repairs are permitted strictly to prevent any immediate threat to life or property and are done with safety as the top priority. However, it’s important to note that such permissions do not mean the building is structurally sound or fit for long-term habitation. They are temporary safety measures, not a replacement for redevelopment. Therefore, these buildings have been added to the recent list.”
MHADA notice categories
79(A) This notice is served to landowners/landlords, instructing them to appoint a developer and submit a redevelopment plan within six months from the date the notice is issued
79(B) If landowners/landlords fail to submit a plan under 79(A), tenants can approach a developer directly and submit a redevelopment plan to MHADA within six months from the date this notice is issued
C-1 Buildings that are structurally unsound and require immediate major repairs, which, if not done on a war footing, would require the evacuation of the residents
C-2 Buildings that require structural repairs but are not unsafe to live in or do not need immediate evacuation
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
