BPP opens doors to ten­ancy for 1,900 fam­il­ies

Date

August 4, 2026

Post by

arZan

Category

News

Decision junks leave-and-licence sys­tem, impacts 40% of Bom­bay Parsi Pun­chayet’s housing stock

For nearly three dec­ades, every few years, 72-yearold Viraf Kapa­dia lived with the same uncer­tainty: would he still have a home? A res­id­ent of the Bom­bay Parsi Pun­chayet’s (BPP) Godrej Baug at Nepean Sea Road, Kapa­dia has spent 28 years leas­ing his apart­ment, wor­ried about being con­sidered a tres­passer if the lease agree­ment were to lapse.

Article by Osama Rawal | Hindustan Times

image

That uncer­tainty may soon end for nearly 1,900 Parsi-Zoroastrian fam­il­ies in Mum­bai. In what is being described as one of the most sig­ni­fic­ant hous­ing policy shifts in recent years, the BPP, the apex body of the com­munity, approved a pro­posal on June 10 allow­ing all res­id­ents liv­ing on leave-and-licence agree­ments to con­vert to a ten­ancy arrange­ment under the Maha­rashtra Rent Con­trol Act. The BPP has since received applic­a­tions from 70 licensees.

“There were attempts to remove me earlier but I sur­vived them. As a licensee, your future depends on the trustee’s decision,which can go against you,” said Kapa­dia.

The 1,900 licensees covered by the decision com­prise nearly 40% of BPP’s hous­ing stock across 22 of its 30 baugs, or hous­ing colon­ies, in Mum­bai. The remain­ing eight baugs fall under other Parsi trusts.

Before 1973, most occu­pants

As a licensee, you always knew your future depended on the trust­ees’ decision. Ten­ancy finally gives fam­il­ies the secur­ity they have lived without for dec­ades. Dr Viraf Kapa­dia, res­id­ent, Godrej Baug, Nepean Sea Road

Rent Act prac­ti­tion­ers includ­ing the internal aud­itor of the BPP Trust have made adverse obser­va­tions and advised us against mak­ing this change.

For dec­ades, there were effect­ively two cat­egor­ies of res­id­ents in the same colony. Why should there have been two policies? Viraf Mehta, chair­per­son, Bom­bay Parsi Pun­chayet

of BPP hous­ing were ten­ants. The leave-and-licence sys­tem was intro­duced after the Bom­bay Rent Act,1947 was amended in 1975, cov­er­ing the major­ity of new occu­pants. After the Maha­rashtra Rent Con­trol Act took effect in 1999, all res­id­ents were allot­ted houses under the leaveand-license arrange­ment – they didn’t have a choice. This cre­ated two dis­tinct cat­egor­ies of occu­pants within BPP hous­ing— older res­id­ents with ten­ancy rights and newer res­id­ents on leave and licence agree­ments.

BPP chair­per­son Viraf Mehta said the decision to con­vert all occu­pants to ten­ancy was promp­ted by con­cerns that the leave-and-licence sys­tem could be mis­used. “There was an instance where the licence mech­an­ism was turned against a wid­owed woman with three chil­dren on the strength of neigh­bours’ com­plaints,” he said.

An open let­ter by three trust­ees said res­id­ents’ cases routinely turned on whether they were ten­ants or licensees because “a licensee is far easier to remove”, mak­ing it “a quiet instru­ment of pres­sure”.

Kapa­dia said the decision has freed res­id­ents from the con­stant fear of evic­tion and reduced anxi­ety dur­ing BPP elec­tions. “If you didn’t sup­port a par­tic­u­lar panel, you always wor­ried what could hap­pen if that panel won,” he said.

Vistasp Con­tractor, a res­id­ent of the BPP’s Gore­gaon com­plex for 15 years, wel­comed the June 10 decision, say­ing ten­ancy would end widely vary­ing licence fees. He, however, feared redevel­op­ment could even­tu­ally weaken the Parsi-only cov­en­ant.

One of the dis­sent­ing trust­ees, Dr Adil Malia, told HT, “As trust­ees, we have a fidu­ciary respons­ib­il­ity to pro­tect the interests of the trust and its prop­er­ties, par­tic­u­larly when retired judges, senior soli­cit­ors, Rent Act prac­ti­tion­ers includ­ing the internal aud­itor of the BPP Trust have made adverse obser­va­tions and advised us against mak­ing this change.”

He said no licensee has ever been evicted by the trust. “We are com­mit­ted to provid­ing full pro­tec­tion to all our dear res­id­ents but that can­not be at the cost of the trust los­ing its char­ac­ter or pro­tect­ive con­trol over its assets,” Malia added.