|     |     |    |    |     |     |  
Mumbai: HC frowns at Mhada lottery clause for Swan Mills workers
not available
Mumbai: HC frowns at Mhada lottery clause for Swan Mills workers
Publish on : 2021-12-11 13:09:54
“Prima facie this does not appeal to us and needs to be rectified,” said Justices Gautam Patel and Madhav Jamdar on a petition by Girni Kamgar Sabha and nearly 50 allottees against Mhada’s June 20, 2012, circular that split Swan Mills into two codes for allotments. MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Wednesday frowned at Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (Mhada) for imposing a condition in its 2012 lottery for housing textile mill workers that rendered many winners of the defunct Swan Mills ineligible. “Prima facie this does not appeal to us and needs to be rectified,” said Justices Gautam Patel and Madhav Jamdar on a petition by Girni Kamgar Sabha and nearly 50 allottees against Mhada’s June 20, 2012, circular that split Swan Mills into two codes for allotments. The petition said that Swan Mills had three units at Kurla, Sewri and Jubilee process (Sewri). Alongwith 17 ot-her mills for the lottery, Swan was given a single code number Mhada’s June 20, 2012, circular split 57 into 57 and 57A and divided the applications into two lots for Sewri and Kurla units. The results were declared on June 28, 2012. Of the 4,718 applications in respect of Swan Mills, 695 were allotted tenements. The winners learnt about the split in code number only when they received their allotment letters in September 2012. They were allotted houses at Sewri although employed at Kurla and vice versa. Employees of Sewri unit were asked to furnish proof that they worked at Kurla unit and those of Kurla were asked to prove they worked at Sewri. Many could not and were disqualified. They did not succeed in appeal. Mhada’s advocate P G Lad sought time saying the government will take necessary st-eps as suggested by the court. Petitioners’ advocates, Arsh-ad Shaikh and Aditya Udeshi, insisted a decision be taken at the earliest considering the plight of the allottees. Adjourning the matter, the judges noted, “We are unable to appreciate how a condition could be subsequently imposed that rendered some of the allottees ineligible on the basis of some requirement. Prima facie it is not sustainable.”57. The workers applied for the lottery.

@2019 TeamUp. All rights reserved. Site visitors are subject to our Privacy Policy and Terms of use.