The Dadar-Matunga Residents’ Association has filed a notice of motion in the Bombay High Court alleging that the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) had failed to comply with a High Court order directing it to consider proposals for redevelopment of buildings that do not come under proposed Grade I or Grade II heritage structures. The association’s plea is likely to be heard by a bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice M S Sonak on Thursday.
The residents have claimed that the corporation has not considered their proposals for redevelopment, thus , failing to comply with the court order that had asked the BMC to consider their proposals on merits, while their petition challenging the heritage tag remains pending in court.
The association claimed that according to the interim order passed by the High Court on February 3, buildings within the precincts that are not classified as proposed Grade I or II heritage structures, can obtain permissions for redevelopent, as stated in the Development Control Rules (DCR), from the BMC.
The petitioners had first challenged the BMC circular dated August 14, 2013, stating that under DCR 67(2)(iii)(b), if the building does not fall under Grade I and II, then the redevelopment proposal need not be referred to the Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee (MHCC).Granting a stay on the circular, the court had then observed, “We are of the view that the petitions are justified in making grievance against the BMC circular dated August 14, 2013.”
The association stated that while the BMC’s building proposal department can consider the development propsals made by the residents of the proposed Dadar-Matunga heritage precinct, special permission would be required from the Municipal Commissioner only if the height of the proposed redeveloped structure is likely to exceed 24 metres.
The redevelopment of buildings in the proposed heritage precincts of Hindu colony, Parsi colony and extension of Five Gardens are awaiting commencement certificates, the association stated. They stated that the proposals should have been considered and granted approval or otherwise by the BMC itself.
The residents have alleged that the corporation has taken an “evasive approach” and failed to comply with the court’s order despite the lapse of five months. They have, therefore, urged the court to direct the BMC to comply with the order.