Dhobi Ghat Under Threat as Developers Eye Valuable Real Estate

In the heart of Mahalaxmi, the jagged concrete skyline casts a dark shadow over something quintessentially Mumbai. This is the city’s largest open-air laundromat, or Dhobi Ghat, where 730 dhobis or washermen hold historical rights – and licences – to wash and dry clothes and linen for a living. The land, owned by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), houses a grid of 730 ‘washing stones’, or concrete cubicles, and a large drying area where each dhobi has been allotted space for two ropes to hang their laundry. Or so it had been for more than a century.

The livelihood of these 730 dhobis, and hundreds of others engaged at the ghat, is at stake as a resurgent Mumbai considers the ghat’s drying area – a whopping 7,724.61 sq metres, just under 2 acres – hot property. Right opposite the antiquated grid of washing stones soar Piramal Realty’s luxury towers, their glass and steel forming a stark contrast with a landscape that has barely changed in decades. For the dhobis, the ghat represents their very survival. For developers, with premium real estate in the vicinity fetching around ₹72,000 per square foot, Dhobi Ghat is little more than a dispensable relic.

Builder circles in. Things began to shift in November 2011, when Resonant Realtors Projects Pvt Ltd (formerly Omkar Realtors Projects Pvt Ltd) attempted to amalgamate the dhobis’ drying area with an adjacent plot it was developing as a 42-storey slum rehabilitation project. This is a common manoeuvre used by developers to usurp land, banking on their financial and legal muscle to ride out court battles that may follow. When the builder approached the BMC to obtain necessary permissions, the civic body said it could proceed only if it secured the consent of the dhobis. None was taken. Still, the BMC gave the builder a letter of intent (LOI) in April 2015. It also issued a Commencement Certificate (CC), the green signal for all real estate projects.

The dhobis rallied together and, under the banner of the Dhobi Audyogic Vikas Society (DAVS), challenged the project before a committee appointed by the government. At a meeting in May 2016, the dhobis demanded either a temporary alternative open space to dry their laundry or monetary compensation until a permanent solution was found. The builder agreed, but the plot was small, filthy, and not suitable for drying laundry.

A fierce struggle followed, with the builder claiming to have kept his promise, but the dhobis pushed back. They filed three writ petitions in the Bombay High Court in 2018, seeking a viable dry yard until a permanent solution was found. However, unmindful of the pending litigation, Resonant Realtors “forcefully” removed all but 28 dhobis from the drying area. The developer assured the court in October 2018 that the dhobis would be provided a temporary space pending a permanent arrangement, and the case was disposed of.

Enter Piramal Reality, which acquired the development rights to the slum rehabilitation project adjacent to Dhobi Ghat from Resonant Reality. “A rehabilitation project was built for the encroachers, generating handsome slum TDR for the builder. The problem is, it swallowed a chunk of our land, adjacent to the encroached property. Even though we lost our drying area, we were offered no viable alternative,” says Mukesh Kanojia, a third-generation dhobi. Watching helplessly as a tower rose on land they had leased for generations, the dhobis began to string ropes above their washing cubicles to dry their laundry. Not only does this makeshift arrangement fail to accommodate the load, Dhobi Ghat, sans its dry yard, has lost 40% of its space. The 730 washing stones, which constitute the heritage portion of the ghat, cover 5 acres, or 20,235 sq m.

Refusing to give up the fight, 22 dhobis moved the Bombay High Court in December 2025. Their petition, filed through advocates Amogh Singh and Ashwin Tripathi, claimed the builder was “intentionally trying to sell the remaining open area to L&T, who had begun to construct a tower on it. Through their plea, they made another powerful point – they claimed the builder, to amalgamate their land with the neighbouring slum scheme, had “fraudulently” converted it from non-slum to slum to avail additional FSI benefits, the petition said.

But the high court held a different view and delivered a crushing blow to the dhobis. On February 23, 2026, a division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe accepted the BMC’s contention that the “rassi holders” had been provided an alternative site to dry their laundry. The court held that the dhobis were using the drying area only to string ropes and were not occupying any residential or commercial structure on the property. Hence, they had no grounds to obstruct the slum rehabilitation project when they had been offered an alternative site, the court ruled. The petitioners were to also receive ₹30,000 a month as monetary compensation, a sum the builder has allegedly stopped paying, say the dhobis.

The washermen point out that neither the builder, nor the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA), nor the BMC has offered them a viable, alternative solution, regardless of their assurances in court. They also say the “unauthorised conversion” of a historical site into a private luxury housing project violates the public trust doctrine, adding that the “high-handed and illegal action” of the authorities and builders have left a deep impact in their lives. In its affidavit filed before the court, Resonant Realtors said, “We were in negotiations to resolve the dispute amicably but they moved court to misuse the judicial machinery for personal gains.”

Labelling the dhobis’ action “opportunistic litigation”, Resonant Realtors also claimed that all 730 dhobis were not impacted. “As per a survey done by the competent authorities, a total of 342 rassi holders used the land to dry clothes, and they have either been given compensation or alternative space. None of the washing stones are located or affected by the slum scheme. In fact, the plot comprising of washing stones is a heritage site and admittedly undisturbed by the present scheme,” the developer said. The BMC too, in its submissions in court, has echoed the developer’s claim that eligible dhobis had been provided an alternative site to dry their laundry.

The SRA, for its part, claims it is a “welfare” body working for the public at large but bound by the courts. “We are examining everything in consonance with the prevailing laws and will take any and every step within that purview,” said SRA counsel Ravleen Sabharwal. “The claims of everyone involved are hollow,” says Ajay Kanojia, at the forefront of the dhobis’ struggle. “The one site they offered us is unusable and yet they brazenly told the court, on several occasions, that they have resolved the dispute,” Kanojia told HT. “We have been trying to approach the BMC since the order was passed but they keep asking us to come later. If no relief is provided, we will file a contempt petition in court.”