This is an archive article published on June 11, 2020
High Court pulls up BMC & MHADA for not razing dilapidated building
Expressing displeasure, the court said that it was unable to understand why the BMC and the MHADA, armed with sufficient statutory powers, have not proceeded to take action for not only removal of occupants but for the demolition of the building.
Accepting petitioner’s argument that there was a real urgency in view of approaching monsoon, the court directed authorities to file response and posted further hearing on June 12. (File)
The Bombay High Court has pulled up the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) and the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) for not initiating any action against a dilapidated building in Bhendi Bazaar area of the city, and said that a masjid or a prayer hall in a dilapidated building has “no relevance at all to the question of public safety”.
Observing that with monsoon approaching, the collapse of a building in a crowded area will inevitably endanger the lives and properties of innocent persons in the vicinity, a single-judge bench of Justice Gautam S Patel on Tuesday asked the civic authorities to file a response stating why they could not demolish the building, Haji Ismail Musafirkhana, despite it being categorised as a ‘dangerous structure’.
The bench was hearing a plea filed by Saifee Burhani Upliftment Trust (SBUT) and other tenants, through senior advocate Viraag Tulzapurkar, seeking an urgent interim relief from the court and direction that they should not be held responsible in case of any mishap relating to the building.
The SBUT has undertaken cluster development and been acquiring title to various buildings in Bhendi Bazaar area in the C-ward. The SBUT submitted that it has been shifting tenants of the building and providing them temporary accommodation and thereafter would provide a permanent alternative accommodation in accordance with the law to eligible tenants.
However, to protect the building from demolition, its ground-floor occupants, through advocate Fazal Mehmood, has argued that the structure could not be razed as firstly, it had a masjid inside, and secondly, it was a Waqf property.
Advocate Aparna Kalathi, for MHADA, told the court that it was facing staff shortage due to the lockdown and it would take action once restrictions were lifted.
After hearing submissions, Justice Patel observed, “The submission is, to my mind, entirely irrelevant. Even assuming there is a masjid, this has no bearing or relevance at all to questions of public safety, for these are paramount, or to the question of the structural soundness of the building in question… It is abundantly clear, and in this city at least there is no shortage of examples, that a collapse of a building especially in a crowded area will inevitably endanger the lives and properties of innocent third parties in the vicinity.”
Story continues below this ad
Expressing displeasure, the court said that it was unable to understand why the BMC and the MHADA, armed with sufficient statutory powers, have not proceeded to take action for not only removal of occupants but for the demolition of the building. “Allowing persons to continue in a structure that is, even according to the authorities, not only a danger but also poses a risk to the public is prima facie completely unacceptable,” Justice Patel said.
Accepting petitioner’s argument that there was a real urgency in view of approaching monsoon, the court directed authorities to file response and posted further hearing on June 12.
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
3 min read
Accepting petitioner’s argument that there was a real urgency in view of approaching monsoon, the court directed authorities to file response and posted further hearing on June 12. (File)
