Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Friday directed that the status of Savarkar Sadan in Dadar, Mumbai, must not be altered until further orders, effectively imposing a status quo on any redevelopment activity.
A bench of Justices AS Chandurkar and Neela Gokhale has issued notices to the Urban Development Department and BMC, asking them to respond by June 13, 2025. It also sought clarity from the state government on the timeline for granting heritage status to the property.
“Till the returnable date, the status of the said property shall not be changed and the position as prevailing today shall be maintained,” the bench said.
The direction came while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Abhinav Bharat Congress, a Hindu organisation led by Dr Pankaj K Phadnis, seeking heritage protection for the building.
Savarkar Sadan, located in Shivaji Park, was once the residence of Hindutva ideologue Vinayak Damodar Savarkar. The PIL urged the Maharashtra government to act on a 2012 recommendation by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to include the building in Mumbai’s official Heritage List. The petitioner highlighted that despite this recommendation, the Urban Development Department had failed to take action for over a decade.
It was only in February 2025, after an email from the Chief Minister’s Office, that the department was directed to examine the matter. However, concerns remain that the property could be demolished before any heritage status is conferred. The petition cited news reports suggesting imminent demolition of the structure.
Dr Phadnis, appearing as petitioner-in-person, argued that the building holds immense historical value due to its association with Savarkar, a key figure in India’s freedom movement and the Hindu nationalist ideology. He warned that redevelopment without heritage designation would cause irreversible damage to the legacy of India’s struggle for independence.
The petition also urged the Central government to consider declaring Savarkar Sadan a “Monument of National Importance,” even though it currently falls short of the 100-year age requirement under existing norms. Drawing a comparison with Jinnah House, which enjoys protected heritage status, the petitioner questioned why a similar recognition was denied to Savarkar Sadan.
Among the reliefs sought are interim protection to prevent any changes to the building, formal inclusion in the heritage list, a central policy to grant national recognition, and compensation for Savarkar’s legal heirs in case redevelopment rights are affected.
