Bombay High Court Rebukes MHADA for Illegal Stay on Pune Housing Redevelopment

Sadashiv Peth, 31st December 2025: The Bombay High Court has come down heavily on officials of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) for illegally stalling the redevelopment of two housing societies in Pune. The controversy began with a handwritten remark by the Chief Minister, influenced by a local MLA, Hemant Narayan Rasane.

In a judgment delivered on December 23, 2025, a Division Bench of Justice G.S. Kulkarni and Justice Aarti Sathe termed the actions of the MHADA officials as a “colourable exercise of power” and “extra-legal interference.”

The petition was filed by Sunglory Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and Nutan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., located in Lokmanya Nagar, Sadashiv Peth, Pune. Both societies sought to redevelop their dilapidated buildings. MHADA had already granted a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to Sunglory CHS on April 9, 2025, while Nutan CHS’s application was pending.

The controversy erupted when the local Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA), Hemant Narayan Rasane, wrote to the Chief Minister on May 14, 2025. The MLA requested a “cluster redevelopment” of the area and asked for the cancellation of individual NOCs granted to societies like Sunglory. Acting on this representation, the Chief Minister remarked on the letter: “Grant stay until further orders.”

The High Court noted that while the Chief Minister’s remark was a recommendation to the Vice President of MHADA, the Vice President never issued a formal stay order. However, subordinate officials—specifically the Chief Architect/Planner and the Chief Officer of the Pune Board—misconstrued the remark. Without any formal order from their superior, these officials issued letters to the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) and the societies, effectively halting the construction work and stalling the NOC process.

The Bench expressed shock at the conduct of the officials, stating they had “overstepped their authority and jurisdiction.” The Court observed, “The MHADA officials have gone a step ahead from what was being remarked by the Hon’ble Chief Minister… We have no hesitation to deprecate such actions of these public officials.”

The Court relied on previous judgments, including Bhimrao Shankar Kudale Vs. MHADA, to reiterate that statutory authorities must not succumb to political pressure or “extra-legal interference” from third parties, such as MLAs, who are unconnected with the specific redevelopment schemes.

During the hearing, MHADA’s counsel admitted that no formal stay order existed and agreed to withdraw the impugned communications immediately. The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, declaring:

1. Sunglory CHS: The NOC issued is legal and valid; redevelopment can proceed. 2. Nutan CHS: MHADA must process their pending proposal and take a logical decision on or before January 15, 2026.

The Court concluded that the arbitrary halting of the project violated the petitioners’ constitutional rights under Article 14 and Article 300A.