HC slams BMC over Tardeo high-rise ‘lawlessness,’ says occupants living without fire nod, OC for 18 floors at ‘own risk’
The bench expressed “surprise” after reviewing a BMC joint inspection report highlighting gross violations by developer Satellite Holdings, noting the building only had a part Completion Certificate (CC) from ground to the 16th floor
4 min read
The HC asked the flat purchasers and developers why such “daylight violations” were required to be overlooked in view of the fire incidents in high-rises in the city (Representative image/File)The Bombay High Court on Monday expressed “shock” over “glaring” multiple violations, including no fire NOC (no-objection certificate) for the entire building for 15 years and no Occupation Certificate (OC) for nearly half the floors of a 34-storey high-rise in Tardeo in South Mumbai. It slammed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) for “failing to take drastic action” and permitting nearly 50 families to occupy the flats by risking their lives and questioned it for “complete lawlessness”.
The HC asked the flat purchasers and developers why such “daylight violations” were required to be overlooked in view of the fire incidents in high-rises in the city. The court also sought a response from the civic body as to why water supply and electricity to the building cannot be cut, and questioned the department concerned as to why permission was given to operate lifts in the building.
The HC stated that the developer and flat purchasers were occupying the units at their “own risk” and there shall be civil and criminal liability on them if rights of third parties, including staff and servants, are violated or breached due to such incidents.
A division bench of Justices Girish S Kulkarni and Arif S Doctor, while hearing batch of pleas pertaining to the tower of Willingdon View Cooperative Housing Society, Tulsiwadi, Tardeo, noted that the construction was completed in 2010 and the BMC permitted the building to be occupied thereafter without fire NOC for nearly 15 years.
The bench expressed “surprise” after reviewing a BMC joint inspection report highlighting gross violations by developer Satellite Holdings, noting the building only had a part Completion Certificate (CC) from ground to the 16th floor.
“What is further glaring and which would in fact shock our conscience is that floors 17 to 34 have no OC,” the bench noted, adding that the floors were illegally occupied.
The HC observed that apart from several illegalities recorded by the BMC, one more illegality was that the entire 34-storey building lacked approval from the Chief Fire Officer (CFO) of the BMC, without which no person can occupy the building.
“We are at a complete loss to understand as to how such illegality and that too with impunity can at all be tolerated by the BMC and as to how there can be resistance on the part of the members/flat purchasers under the garb of any regularization application and more particularly when the developer admittedly has undertaken several unauthorised works including Floor Space Index (FSI) violations,” the bench observed.
It noted that flat purchasers were trying to convince the court by seeking a “complete go-by to the lawful requirements while chanting the routine mantra of regularisation”.
The court further stated that compliance with fire safety norms by the CFO for any high-rise was “non-negotiable” in view of past fatal fire incidents, including Kamla Mills fire, and “there cannot be relaxation of such norms in any manner whatsoever”.
It directed the CFO to file an affidavit on fire safety compliance and violations, and further asked the BMC’s building and proposal department to file an affidavit in view of serious doubts raised in 2012 as to whether floors 1 to 16 can actually be said to have any OC.
“In the meantime, we are of the clear opinion that in such a situation, all the land purchasers/members of the society, who in our prima facie opinion are illegally occupying their flats and who actually need to vacate and more particularly those from 17th to 34th floor, shall continue to do (occupy) so at their own risk and consequences,” the HC said, adding they shall not be liable to be compensated by authorities in case of an untoward incident.
Posting further hearing to Thursday, the HC said that if the BMC and other authorities respond that such gross illegalities require water and electricity supply to be cut, it would have no alternative but to permit the authorities to take appropriate action.
You May Like
Photos
