MUMBAI: In a crucial update that may shape the future of redevelopment across the city, a committee established by the Bombay High Court has delivered its findings on March 5, 2026, examining contentious notices issued under Section 79A of the MHADA Act.
The court is poised to hear this matter and decide if the halted redevelopment of numerous unsafe buildings can continue, impacting over 13,000 ageing structures and countless residents living in hazardous conditions. This comes just ahead of the looming monsoon season.
The heart of the issue lies with Section 79A, a legal provision enacted in 2020 to expedite the redevelopment of “cessed buildings”—older structures, typically constructed before 1940, that are under the jurisdiction of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) for repair and redevelopment.
Essentially, this section permits authorities to intervene if landlords neglect to redevelop unsafe buildings within six months. It also grants tenants—if at least 51% consent—the authority to oversee redevelopment, thereby preventing projects from being delayed for years due to disputes or inaction.
However, the implementation encountered obstacles when the High Court issued a stay on 935 notices from MHADA, expressing concerns about potential abuse of power and procedural errors.
A “stay” refers to a temporary suspension mandated by the court, halting all redevelopment actions associated with these notices until the matter is legally settled. This leaves thousands of residents uncertain, as they continue to inhabit buildings that could be structurally unsound.
The panel appointed by the court conducted extensive hearings, allowing both tenants and landlords from affected structures to present their viewpoints. The results reportedly reveal a significant divide: a majority of tenants support the 79A mechanism, asserting that it provides a much-needed solution to long-standing redevelopment delays—often caused by absentee landlords or legal disagreements.
For these residents, the provision represents a viable pathway to safer living conditions. Conversely, landlords contest the notices, claiming infringements on their property rights, which are constitutionally protected rights that ensure ownership and control over property.
In simpler terms, landlords are concerned about losing their decision-making authority regarding the redevelopment of their own buildings. The urgency of this law is rooted in a history of tragic building collapses in Mumbai, such as the 2017 Husaini Building disaster (33 deaths), the 2019 Dongri collapse (14 deaths), and a 2020 Fort building incident (10 deaths).
These events prompted the government to adopt stricter intervention powers to avert loss of life due to delayed redevelopment. Data highlights the severity of the situation, with Mumbai boasting over 13,000 cessed buildings, many in dire condition. According to RTI data, from 2021 to August 2025, the city reported 345 instances of building collapses or partial collapses, resulting in 8 deaths and 28 injuries. Over a longer timeframe, from 1970 to 2018, 815 lives were lost in similar incidents. Experts caution that the risks escalate during the monsoon when weakened structures are more susceptible to failure.
Activists argue that the outcome of this case could create a balance between safety and legal rights. Jeetendra Ghadge from The Young Whistleblowers Foundation stated that the panel’s process was thorough and expressed hope that the redevelopment of hazardous buildings won’t face additional delays, while also calling for strict action if any irregularities in issuing notices are discovered.
The upcoming decision from the High Court is expected to have significant implications—not only for Mumbai’s redevelopment landscape but also as a potential framework for other cities dealing with ageing urban infrastructure. For residents, the verdict could be pivotal, leading them to either continue facing risks or finally achieving safer homes.
