The Bombay High Court has criticised the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) over what it described as an “alarming haste” in carrying out the demolition of a property, observing that the civic body appeared to have acted in an “extremely high-handed manner.”
The observations were made by Justice Milind N. Jadhav while hearing an appeal filed by Ashok Mahadev Kule against the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai.
According to court records, the BMC issued a notice under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 on January 23, 2026, alleging that the structure in question was unauthorised. The property owner submitted a response to the notice on January 27. However, a speaking order was passed by the designated officer on January 31, reportedly without granting the appellant a personal hearing. The structure was subsequently demolished on February 6.
The High Court noted that the entire process — from issuance of notice to demolition — was completed within less than two weeks, raising concerns about whether principles of natural justice had been properly followed.
Representing the appellant, Advocate Janay Jain, instructed by Advocate Vijay Shukla, argued that the demolished property was a long-standing censused structure that had existed for over 50 years. It was also submitted before the court that documentary records establishing the legality and historical existence of the premises had allegedly been ignored by the civic authorities.
The appellant further contended that the same structure had previously received a Section 351 notice in 1984, suggesting that it was not a newly constructed unauthorised building.
During the hearing, the court referred to the BMC’s own circular dated April 24, 2025, which states that demolition action should not be initiated before the expiry of the statutory notice period or within 15 days from the service of notice, whichever is later.
Justice Jadhav observed that the civic body appeared to have acted contrary to its own guidelines and remarked that planning authorities cannot “take law into their own hands”, deny affected individuals a fair opportunity to be heard, and remain beyond judicial scrutiny.
The court also expressed concern over allegations that, in some redevelopment-related disputes, demolition actions may be influenced by pressure from interested developers seeking rapid removal of old structures.
The Bombay High Court has directed the Deputy Municipal Commissioner to file a detailed affidavit in the matter. The court further cautioned that if satisfactory explanations are not provided, it may consider ordering reconstruction and restoration of the demolished property.
The matter is scheduled to be heard next on June 18, 2026.
Source: Mid-day
