Despite a huge need for PAP homes, BMC plans to delete reservation in Jogeshwari

MUMBAI: With a huge requirement for rehabilitation housing, the BMC aims to generate between 5,000 and 10,000 Project Affected Persons (PAP) tenements in each administrative zone of the city

MUMBAI: With a huge requirement for rehabilitation housing, the BMC aims to generate between 5,000 and 10,000 Project Affected Persons (PAP) tenements in each administrative zone of the city. Yet, even as it faces this imperative and has committed thousands of crores of rupees towards PAP projects, it is considering releasing 1,802.75 sq metres of land reserved specifically for rehabilitation and resettlement at Majas in Jogeshwari East.

The BMC has approved 34,129 PAP tenements so far. A PAP statement cited in a representation to the civic administration also puts the number of tenements covered by five major projects at 33,332, involving an estimated ₹20,751.67 crore in project costs and around ₹15,117.81 crore in credit notes. Of these, credit notes worth approximately ₹4,741.65 crore have already been issued.

Despite the scale of the requirement, a proposal before the BMC’s Improvement Committee seeks to delete the reservation and include the land in the adjoining residential zone, which has MHADA buildings that need to be redeveloped. Questions have been raised about why a separate parcel reserved for future rehabilitation should be surrendered to facilitate residential development.

The larger plot which encompasses the 1,802.75-sq-metre rehab component is also a significant public-purpose land resource. Under the earlier Development Plan, it carried reservations for public housing, a bus station, secondary schools, playgrounds, a post office, roads and other amenities. Under DP 2034, it continues to carry several public-purpose reservations and civic facilities, including schools, playgrounds, a police station, BEST bus facility and affordable housing apart from rehabilitation and resettlement.

Azmi demanded that the BMC first establish whether the MHADA redevelopment could be undertaken without sacrificing the rehab reservation. “If its deletion is considered essential, the BMC should identify an equivalent amount of rehabilitation land to replace the amount being lost,” he said. “Also, why is the entire 1,802.75 sq metres being automatically converted into a residential zone? Even if the existing reservation is found unsuitable, the BMC should examine whether the land can instead continue to serve a public purpose, including public housing or another municipal or social infrastructure requirement.”

The Congress leader’s letter also seeks details of the additional development potential that could arise from the proposed change, including FSI, fungible FSI, TDR, built-up or saleable area and any increase in land value. It has further sought clarity on the beneficiary of such additional development potential and whether any premium, betterment charge or other financial consideration would accrue to the BMC. Azmi has urged the BMC not to proceed with the proposed modification until the planning and financial implications have been fully assessed.

The timing of the proposed change has also been questioned. The documents accompanying the proposal record redevelopment-related permissions during 2024, including an amended 10A dated November 7, 2024, and a further commencement certificate dated December 16, 2024. MHADA’s request for deletion of the rehabilitation reservation comes after all this on November 21, 2025, with a revised plan prepared in July 2026.

The controversy comes amid wider concerns over the availability and protection of public-purpose land in Mumbai. With the city requiring rehabilitation housing for people displaced by infrastructure projects and redevelopment, the availability of land reserved for such purposes is increasingly significant. The civic administration will now have to assess whether the proposed release of the Jogeshwari parcel is justified by an overriding planning requirement, and whether the loss of rehabilitation land can be offset by an equivalent alternative resource.

The proposal was not taken in the improvements committee last week but is slated to be tabled again.