The Bombay High Court has refused to grant protection to unauthorised constructions spread across nearly 34,000 sq ft in Andheri West and imposed a cost of Rs 10 lakh on the property owner, observing that the penalty should act as a deterrent to those violating construction laws.
A division bench of Justices A S Gadkari and Kamal Khata dismissed petitions filed by Shah Constructions Co. Ltd challenging demolition notices issued by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC).
The court also criticised the civic administration and elected representatives for failing to prevent unauthorised constructions despite being legally responsible for taking action.
“Unfortunately, having dealt with several cases, it is evident that the public mindset is to carry out construction first and seek regularisation only if, and when, the concerned authority ever acts. There are only negligible instances where the authority has taken prompt action. Most constructions are being carried out overnight and later expanded as required over a period of time.”
The BMC had issued notices on May 26 and July 1 through its K-West ward officer concerning several structures on the property. These included five porta cabins, a temporary car workshop shed, three banquet halls, multipurpose sheds, an office and a storage shed. Another petition involved a shop, office and toilet.
The petitioner claimed the structures were “tolerated commercial structures constructed prior to April 1, 1962”. However, the civic body said the owner failed to establish that the constructions existed before the cut-off date and directed their removal within 15 days.
The bench noted that a 1961 BMC licence for stone-cutting did not establish the existence of the disputed structures before 1962. It also said electricity bills, assessment records and shop and establishment licences cannot legalise unauthorised construction.
The judges further observed that illegal structures are often shielded through claims of repair permissions.
“As a matter of record, the BMC has over the years miserably failed to take any action against numerous such unauthorised constructions, whether residential or commercial, despite being duty-bound to do so. The reasons are obvious though best left unsaid. The elected representatives are equally liable, if not more so; having been elected by the people, they were duty bound to control it.”
Although Shah Constructions offered to demolish nearly 18,000 sq ft of the unauthorised area, the court termed the proposal “nothing but an attempt to retain what is entirely unauthorized”.
The bench directed the petitioner to pay Rs 10 lakh to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa’s Advocate Academy and Research Center, warning that allowing illegal structures to remain would suggest that “illegalities are pardoned if backed by money”.
Source: Hindustan Times
