The Supreme Court on Friday declined to halt the Adani Group’s ₹5,069-crore Dharavi redevelopment project, despite a challenge from UAE-based Seclink Technologies Corporation, which claimed its ₹7,200-crore bid was unfairly scrapped.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar sought responses from the Maharashtra government and Adani Properties Pvt Ltd on a petition challenging the Bombay High Court’s December 20, 2024, verdict. The high court had cleared the mega-redevelopment project, dismissing claims of bias and stating that the process was fair and transparent.
Seclink Technologies, which was initially the highest bidder in 2018 with a ₹7,200-crore offer, saw its tender scrapped by the government, which later awarded the contract to Adani Group in 2022. The company’s legal counsel argued before the SC that it was willing to increase its bid by 20% to ₹8,640 crore, but the court did not intervene, instead directing Adani Properties to make payments through a single bank account and submit an affidavit regarding future commitments.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Adani, defended the progress of the 259-hectare Dharavi project, stating that construction had begun, funds had been deposited, and 2,000 people were already employed. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta also noted that railway quarters had been demolished to make way for new constructions.
The high court had earlier rejected Seclink’s claims that the 2022 tender was “tailor-made” for Adani, pointing out that three bidders had participated in the process. The Maharashtra government maintained that the cancellation of the 2018 tender was due to factors such as COVID-19 and the Russia-Ukraine war, which impacted economic conditions.
Dharavi, one of the world’s largest and most densely populated slums, is set for a massive transformation under this redevelopment project, but the legal battle over its execution continues. The matter will be heard again in the week of May 25, with the court emphasizing that no special equities would be granted to either party.
