In Brief
Central Bank of India leased residential premises built by MHADA for its Class III and IV employees. The Bank later proposed redevelopment by demolishing the buildings. When eviction notices were issued, affected employees challenged the proceedings, arguing the premises were a condition of service and that the Bank violated the lease by planning luxury apartments instead. The Supreme Court held that allotment was discretionary and not a condition of service. Employees lacked standing to challenge the Bank-MHADA lease terms, as they were not parties to that agreement. The Court dismissed the petitions but set a reasonable eviction deadline (31 March 2016) and declined to enforce damages against employees who had pursued their remedies in good faith.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.