The Housing Department implementing the scheme through the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) now insists that the tenants produce a succession certificate as a precondition to being granted ownership from their landlords even if they fulfil the other criteria as per the scheme announced in 1986.

At least 16 applications from tenants groups willing to form a cooperative housing society have been rejected by the department in the last month on this ground alone, despite clearances from the Cooperative Cell of MHADA's Mumbai Buildings Repair and Reconstruction Board. A total 200 applications were rejected in the last two months on various other grounds.

Tenants groups say the demand for asuccession certificate is unlawful as Chapter VIII A of the MHADA Act clearly recognises the `occupier' (see box). It merely stipulates that applicants must submit an affidavit and an indemnity bond, which suffices. A succession certificate, on the other hand, is granted by a high court to prove that a person residing in a premises succeeds to the property of the deceased individual.

Tenants groups allege that the government's move is a deliberate attempt to thwart tenants, who can then be manipulated.

Significantly, tenants of the ill-famed Laxmi Niwas building in Matunga, where the widow of Ramesh Kini resides, have also had their applications rejected on this ground.

On June 3, Ramesh Chheda, chief promoter of the Laxmi Niwas cooperative housing society, received a letter from the Housing Department which stated that six of the nine occupants have to submit succession certificates. Among them is Kini's widow, Shiela.

Chedda had filed an application for formation of the housing society with MHADA onOctober 31, 1989. His application was cleared by the executive engineer of MHADA's Cooperative Cell as the tenants had already deposited the required 30 per cent compensation. Now, their application stands rejected and the tenants have been asked to submit a fresh application along with copies of succession certificates.

Till date, MHADA has received hundreds of applications from various tenants groups but this is the first time such a demand has been made.

``The government has imposed this extra demand to harass us,'' says advocate Jawahar Thakkar, representing the Laxmi Niwas cooperative housing society. ``A succession certificate is required only if there is a dispute about the heir. The state government's requisition for a succession certificate was without jurisdiction and contrary to the law,'' Thakkar points out.

Morever, he underscores, the Housing Department has issued letters demanding certificates in at least two cases to prove succession from living persons, which is a contradiction interms.

``The demand for a succession certificate of a living person is unlawful and shows non-application of mind. It has happened in the case of Hemkuverben Sangoi, a tenant of Laxmi Niwas, who has given the power of attorney to her son Manilal who resides with her,'' he explains. Chandrashekhar Prabhu, former president of MHADA, and Anil Goenka, president of the Federation of the Old Buildings Cooperative Housing Societies, both dismiss the new demand as nothing but an excuse to delay the tenants' applications. ``Whosoever proves that he is staying in the building prior to February 2, 1986, and proves it by way of a ration card and other relevant documents is entitled to be a member of the proposed cooperative housing society and the proposals are accordingly approved by MHADA and sent to Mantralaya,'' Goenka says.

In another case, the office of the secretary of the Housing Department has asked the tenant to state whether there is any court case filed by the landlord that is pending. ``This isridiculous as this also does not come in the way of approving the proposals,'' he adds.

The scheme

MHADA had amended Chapter VIII A of its act in 1986 introducing the scheme which allows tenants of cessed buildings falling under Category A (constructed before September 1, 1940) to acquire ownership from their landlords if 70 per cent of the occupiers apply to the Mumbai Buildings Repairs and Reconstruction Board to move state government to for acquisition of the land together with the building. The tenants have to pay 100 months rent to the board and an advance of 30 per cent of it when the application is approved. Though there are 19,800 buildings in Category A in the island city, the scheme has received a poor response due to certain other preconditions which have deterred tenants. Therefore, the board has received only several hundred applications. While Housing Department now insists on a succession certificate, the MHADA Act, 1976, stipulates that applicants who conform to the definition of an`occupier' suffices. Section 2(25) of the act, defines an occupier as: (a) any person who for the time being is paying or is liable to pay to the owner the rent or any portion of the rent of the land or building in respect of which such rent is paid or is payable; (b) an owner in occupation of or otherwise using his land or building; (c) a rent free tenant of any land or building; (d) a licencee in occupation of any land or building; and (e) any person who is liable to pay to the owner damages for the use and occupation of any land or building.