A controversial case in Mumbai has brought to light alleged irregularities in rehabilitation policies linked to road-widening projects, with accusations that developers are exploiting regulatory provisions to gain excessive floor space index (FSI) benefits.
Two pavement dwellers from Lower Parel, Tukaram Shinde and Nasirali Ishraf Ali Khan, were each allotted two rehabilitation flats—one under the Project Affected Persons (PAP) policy of the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation and another under Regulation 33(12)(B) of the Development Control and Promotion Regulations (DCPR). Compounding the anomaly, both individuals are listed as occupants of the same hutment, despite rules allowing only one flat per tenement.
Experts have flagged this as a violation. “There is no question of a single individual getting two rehabilitation flats. This is a serious violation of the law,” said former IPS officer and advocate Y P Singh.
The issue, first highlighted in October 2025 by RTI activist Santosh Daundkar, points to a larger pattern where developers allegedly misuse Regulation 33(12)(B)—originally designed to ease road bottlenecks—by inflating beneficiary lists or including fictitious names. The provision offers significantly higher FSI compared to other redevelopment norms, making it particularly lucrative in prime areas like Worli and Parel.
Singh further alleged that developers often show rehabilitation units in project plans to secure approvals, only to later acquire these flats from beneficiaries and merge them into larger luxury units. “The builder not only gets the rehabilitation FSI but also the incentive FSI. It’s the proverbial case of ‘having one’s cake and eating it too!”
Despite the seriousness of the allegations, action remains pending. Additional municipal commissioner Ashwini Joshi had ordered ward-level reports and a vigilance probe, while municipal commissioner Bhushan Gagrani acknowledged lapses and called for stricter implementation.
However, Daundkar claims little progress has been made. “The vigilance inquiry has been on since October and the amended circular by Gagrani serves no purpose. The civic administration has shown no intention to bring the culprits to book.”
Source: Hindustan Times
