_pages-to-jpg-0001.jpg)
Mumbai, the bustling financial capital of India, is a city of stark contrasts. Skyscrapers pierce the skyline while over six million people (nearly half the population) huddle in sprawling slums, deprived of basic amenities like clean water and sanitation.
Established in 1995, the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) was envisioned as a groundbreaking solution to this urban crisis, leveraging market forces to rehouse slum dwellers at no cost to the government. By granting developers extra Floor Space Index (FSI) and Transfer of Development Rights (TDR), the SRA allows private builders to profit from premium real estate while providing free tenements to eligible residents. Yet, after nearly three decades, the SRA's promise of a "slum-free Mumbai" remains elusive, marred by inefficiencies, corruption, and substandard outcomes. It's time to confront these flaws head-on and reform the system before it perpetuates inequality rather than alleviating it.
The SRA's origins trace back to the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance, and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, but it gained momentum in the mid-1990s under a Shiv Sena-BJP government that introduced an innovative land-as-resource model. Developers bid for slum pockets, rehabilitate occupants in multistory buildings on-site, and sell additional units in the open market. Eligibility is tied to residency proofs predating January 1, 2000, ensuring only long-term dwellers benefit. This public-private partnership was hailed as pragmatic, especially in a land-scarce city where traditional government-funded housing had failed. Over the years, the size of rehabilitation tenements has grown from 180 square feet in 1995 to 300 square feet today, reflecting incremental policy tweaks.
On paper, the SRA boasts notable achievements. As of 2024-25, it has completed 16,673 units in a single year, with 3.34 lakh more under construction and a ambitious target of over five lakh homes by 2030—doubling its output from the past 29 years. Since inception, it has rehabilitated around 1.5 to 2 lakh families, providing them with legal ownership, indoor sanitation, and protection from evictions. In areas like Dharavi, partial redevelopments have integrated informal economies, preserving livelihoods in leatherwork and pottery. Proponents argue that without SRA, Mumbai's housing deficit would be even more acute, given the city's 2,597 slum clusters housing 1.38 million settlements. The model has inspired similar initiatives nationwide, as seen in Maharashtra's 2025 Housing Policy, which emphasizes densification and private incentives. For many, moving from precarious shanties to concrete structures marks a step toward dignity.
However, these gains are overshadowed by systemic failures that have drawn sharp criticism. A 20-year review revealed a dismal success rate below 13%, with only 197 of 1,524 projects completed, leaving thousands in limbo. After 25 years, just 200,000 dwellers have been rehoused against a need for millions, averaging a paltry 9,000 rehabilitations annually. The root issues? Rampant delays due to bureaucratic red tape, developer disputes, and political interference. In 2025 alone, the Bombay High Court quashed a minister's meddling in a project and criticized the SRA for unilaterally declaring private lands as slums without due process, stalling rehabilitations and eroding trust. An amnesty scheme launched in 2024 for stalled projects saw low uptake, highlighting dwellers' skepticism.
Worse, the quality of housing often replicates slum-like conditions vertically. Tenements are cramped, poorly ventilated, and plagued by health hazards like tuberculosis from inadequate sunlight and fresh air. Long corridors disrupt community bonds, while shoddy construction—leaky roofs, non-functional lifts, and overflowing sewage—fuels resentment. The model disproportionately benefits builders, who reap hefty profits from free-sale components while skimping on rehab quality. Excluded post-2000 residents face displacement without alternatives, spawning new informal settlements. Critics argue the SRA distorts the housing market, inflating prices and ignoring mixed-use needs of slum economies. Moreover, corruption thrives in opaque processes, with unregulated developer competition fostering rent-seeking. The High Court's recent rebuke for delays in appointing a new CEO underscores governance lapses.
These shortcomings aren't inevitable; they're policy choices that demand reform. The SRA must prioritize transparency by mandating public audits of projects and stricter enforcement of building standards. Community involvement—through resident cooperatives in planning—could ensure designs respect social fabrics, as demonstrated in successful pilots like Sangharsh Nagar, with open spaces and amenities. Updating eligibility cutoffs and integrating rental options would address exclusion. The government should cap developer profits to fund better infrastructure, drawing from best practices in Ahmedabad's slum networking or Odisha's land rights models. Without such changes, the SRA risks becoming a tool for elite enrichment rather than equitable urban renewal.
Mumbai's slums are a symptom of deeper failures in housing policy, but the SRA holds untapped potential. With bold reforms, it could transform vertical ghettos into vibrant communities, fulfilling the dream of a truly inclusive city. Policymakers must act now—before another generation is condemned to the margins.
