Mumbai: In a relief for one of India’s oldest industrial houses, the Bombay city civil court has quashed a decades-old govt notification that sought to classify Godrej & Boyce manufacturing land in Vikhroli as a slum area. The judgment concludes the legal case, effectively shielding the private property from state acquisition under the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act. “It is hereby declared that no valid declaration exists under Section 4 (1) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act in respect of suit land. The defendant nos 1 and 2 (additional collector and deputy collector ENC) are hereby restrained from treating the colony on suit land as slum area under Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, until valid declaration is made,” Judge A K Kale said.The dispute originated in 1978 when the deputy collector issued a notification declaring a 7,850-square-metre (around 2-acre) portion of the Godrej estate as a slum. Godrej & Boyce challenged this and submitted the land— originally acquired through historical conveyances dating back to the East India Company—was not a slum but a transit camp for migrant labourers. The company maintained these workers were employed by contractors for ongoing construction projects and were provided temporary housing and building materials free of charge. The company argued the inhabitants were provided with building materials by the firm itself and paid no rent, making them temporary licensees rather than independent slum dwellers.It was noted the state had failed to act on its own notification for 10 years. The judge pointed out after a flurry of notices in the late 1970s, the govt remained silent until 1988. When officials finally conducted a site inspection in 1989, they found the land vacant. The court found that because the company had shifted its labour force according to construction needs, the “slum” the state claimed to be improving did not actually exist at the site described in the govt gazette. The court ultimately held “the declaration under Section 4 (1) of the Slum Act cannot be said to be valid one” and granted a permanent injunction against the state authorities.The court also highlighted a procedural conflict, at the time the slum notification was issued, the state was already embroiled in a separate high court suit against Godrej regarding the ownership of the Vikhroli lands. The judge found it improper for the state to invoke slum redevelopment powers while the fundamental question of who owned the land remained undecided.The plea also addressed interference by outside agitators. The company had alleged that local activists and members of the Dalit Panther organisation had trespassed on the property, held unauthorised meetings, and intimidated workers to stop them from reporting to duty. The company claimed these outsiders were falsely promising the labourers that the govt would grant them ownership of the land.In the final order, the court granted a permanent injunction against both the state and the specific individuals involved in the agitation. The judge ruled that “the notification, therefore, is invalid and it is of nullity”. The judge ordered that the state authorities are “restrained from treating the colony on suit land as slum area… until valid declaration is made”. Additionally, the court barred the activists from preventing labourers or company officers from entering the estate.
