Bombay HC slams BMC, MHADA for pressuring tenants over developer’s OC default

The court directed MHADA’s CEO and the BMC to investigate the actions of their officers, who have allegedly caused public financial losses.

BMC, MHADA, Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation BMC, Bombay High Court, Mumbai news, Mumbai current affairs, Maharashtra news, Indian express, current affairs

“The BMC is equally responsible. As a public-serving entity, the BMC cannot and should not allow any building to operate without an OC,” the bench stated.

The Bombay High Court slammed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) for failing to take responsibility in issuing the Occupation Certificate (OC) for tenants of shops on a redeveloped plot in Mahim (West) over the past 25 years.

The court directed MHADA’s CEO and the BMC to investigate the actions of their officers, who have allegedly caused public financial losses.

The bench reprimanded both BMC and MHADA for pressuring the tenants instead of holding the developer accountable for failing to meet the redevelopment conditions.

The court has mandated that MHADA issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to the petitioners by August 30, and BMC must grant the OC by September 20.

“The BMC is equally responsible. As a public-serving entity, the BMC cannot and should not allow any building to operate without an OC,” the bench stated.

On August 13, a division bench of Justices Mahesh S. Sonak and Kamal R Khata ruled on two petitions seeking directives for BMC and MHADA to issue the OC for properties leased by tenants of Mumtaj Begum Shah and others.

The plot in question, located in Mahim, includes three chawls, nine shops, and nine residential tenements built in 1946.

Story continues below this ad

The tenants, represented by advocates Pradeep Thorat and Aniesh Jadhav, also sought a waiver of additional municipal taxes imposed on them.

In 1986, Raj Realtors Construction Company Pvt Ltd acquired the property from the owners. The tenants cooperated with the redevelopment and vacated their premises, with the agreement that their shops would be part of the new construction’s front wing, and the rear wing would include residential accommodations and salable flats.

Although the tenants received their redeveloped shops, the developer failed to secure the OC for these properties, resulting in BMC withholding water and sewerage services while charging 150 per cent of the regular property tax. The BMC informed the tenants that the OC was delayed because MHADA had not issued the final NOC.

Since February 1999, communication between the petitioners, BMC, and MHADA has been ongoing. The issue arose because the developer was granted a Floor Space Index (FSI) of two but failed to surrender 1,986 square feet to MHADA, leading to the additional tax penalty.

Story continues below this ad

The front wing of the property was auctioned in January 2000, prompting the tenants to approach the high court over the authorities’ actions.

The high court has directed MHADA to secure either the surrender area or its market value from the developer. The court criticised the relationship between MHADA, BMC, and the developer, noting, “We find that the BMC and MHADA have been unjustly pressuring the tenants for costs related to water and sewerage services that were not provided. The nexus between MHADA, BMC, and the Developer is apparent. The MHADA was not a private entity that can waive conditions for the developer at its whims and fancies or foist such conditions on the tenants to pressure them.”

The court instructed BMC to reconcile payments made by the petitioners and refund any surplus amounts related to the additional municipal taxes.

Omkar Gokhale

Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions. Expertise & Authority Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage. Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in: Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include: Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes). Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty). Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict. Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability. Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges. Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram