‘Unacceptable state of affairs’: HC raps BMC over redevelopment of buildings

Through their pleas, the residents of the said property raised complaints of non-payment of transit rent after they vacated their premises in 2010 and delay in redevelopment of their building.

The bench called it “unacceptable abdication of municipal administration, duties and obligations” by BMC in not completing redevelopment and payment of transit rent.

Transit rent is paid by a developer or a developing authority to eligible residents vacating their premises for redevelopment or rehabilitation purposes, till a permanent alternate accommodation is available to them.

A division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Kamal Khata on August 28 noted in its order, “… this is an unacceptable state of affairs from every perspective that when it comes to development supervised by the BMC such as the present one, where BMC is the owner of the building that goes into redevelopment, there is no structured development supervision system in place.”

The Court noted that Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) and Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) have now developed “fairly detailed and sophisticated systems” for monitoring development. “We see no reason why BMC should be excluded from this discipline,” it added.

It noted that while SRA and MHADA insist the transit rent be deposited to eligible persons in advance, the BMC does not do so. It also said the BMC does not even decide transit rent amount and instead leaves it to the developer and the society and “this process invariably leads to ambiguity and confusion”.

It further noted that the SRA and MHADA have systems to ensure development work of rehab or reconstructed premises is done with a specific schedule and if the same is not met with, the developer is held responsible, given a warning and is forced to be substituted if no further improvement in the work. “We see no reason why the BMC should be excluded from this practice either,” the court noted.

The bench further said that it “cannot dictate a law” on this aspect of the matter. However, it commended to the civic body “at the highest levels that this be taken up on priority and that a structured system be put in place by means of a circular or some regulations”.

The court directed the copy of its order to be sent to the BMC commissioner and its law officer to take necessary steps.