The Bombay High Court has directed the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) and the Maharashtra government to clarify what action will be taken against more than 400 officials allegedly responsible for allowing thousands of illegal constructions in the city, observing that issuing show-cause notices alone is insufficient.
The matter came up during the hearing of a contempt petition filed by advocate Kishore Shetty regarding action against 4,946 unauthorised structures within the NMMC limits.
Appearing for the civic body, Senior Advocate Anil Anturkar informed the court that the Municipal Commissioner had issued show-cause notices to nearly 400 officials linked to the illegal constructions. He also submitted that the current Municipal Commissioner was the first to initiate action against officials of the corporation over the issue.
However, a division bench comprising Justices Ajay Gadkari and Kamal Khata questioned the adequacy of the action taken so far. The court observed that while notices had been issued, it wanted to know what disciplinary or legal action would actually follow against the officials concerned.
The bench further remarked that Navi Mumbai is a planned city and not a slum settlement, adding that timely action by civic officials could have prevented the proliferation of unauthorised structures.
During the hearing, the civic body also informed the court that some of the officials had since been transferred, while others had retired, making disciplinary proceedings more challenging. Taking note of this, the High Court directed the Maharashtra government to assist the municipal corporation in determining the appropriate course of action against such officials and submit its response at the next hearing.
During the previous hearing, the High Court had observed that nearly 4,946 illegal constructions could not have come up without the involvement or negligence of the concerned officials. It had directed the Municipal Commissioner to submit an affidavit naming all officers and department heads who failed to act while the unauthorised structures were being built, along with details of the disciplinary or legal action proposed against them.
Source: Loksatta
