New Delhi, March 8, 2025 – The Supreme Court has set aside a Bombay High Court order that vacated an interim relief granted in a writ petition that had been in operation for over two and a half years.

The apex court ruled that the High Court should have continued the relief for a reasonable period, allowing the appellant a fair chance to seek legal remedies.

The bench, comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, strongly disapproved of the Bombay High Court’s decision, stating, “We do not approve this approach on the part of the High Court.”

The interim relief granted on August 30, 2022, was ordered to remain in force until the High Court pronounces its judgment.

Background of the Case

The case stems from a writ petition where Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Private Limited had secured interim relief from the Bombay High Court on August 30, 2022. This relief was subsequently extended multiple times.

However, on February 12, 2025, while reserving judgment, the High Court vacated the relief, leaving the appellant without a legal safeguard.

The judgment was digitally signed and uploaded on February 17, 2025, triggering an appeal before the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court emphasized that vacating an interim relief without prior notice or reasonable opportunity to challenge it was unfair.

The bench observed that all High Court benches pass multiple orders daily, and it takes time for litigants to obtain copies of judgments and file appeals.

The court stated that if the High Court found no merit in the writ petition, it should have dismissed it outright on February 12, 2025, allowing the appellant to seek further legal recourse.

“When an interim relief has been in effect for over two and a half years, it is necessary for the Court to extend the same for a reasonable time so that the appellant can challenge the order,” the bench noted.

Supreme Court’s Directions

Considering the principles of fairness and natural justice, the Supreme Court issued the following directives:

• The interim relief granted on August 30, 2022, shall remain in force until the Bombay High Court delivers its final judgment in the writ petition.
• If the writ petition is dismissed, the High Court must extend the relief for a reasonable period to allow the appellant to appeal.
• The Supreme Court has not ruled on the merits of the case, leaving all issues open for consideration by the Bombay High Court.

Legal Representation

• For the Petitioner: Senior Advocate Meenakshi Arora, along with Advocates Mohit D. Ram (AOR), Nishant Chothani, Ankit Lohia, Atman Mehta, and Vipul Patel.
• For the Respondents: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, assisted by Advocates Chirag M. Shroff (AOR), Mahima C. Shroff, Anand Thumbayil, Sushant Dogra, and Vikas Singh Jangra (AOR).

Bench Details

• Judges: Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
• Case Title: Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Private Limited v. Mumbai Housing and Area Development Board & Anr.
• Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 6122/2025