The Bombay high Court has stayed construction on a plot of land at Ambedkar Road in Khar west, a part of which was reserved for recreational ground (RG) / playground (PG) in the Revised Development Plan of 1992.
A division bench of chief justice Dipankar Datta and justice MS Karnik stayed the construction on Monday observing: “Since no construction activity can be carried out on such plot bearing Survey No.1143 in terms of the said order, we restrain any further construction on such land without the leave of the Court.”
In April 1995, the Supreme Court had stayed construction on the plot since it was reserved as RG.
Reiterating the apex court’s order, the HC said: “Despite an order of the Supreme Court dated April 3, 1995 restraining construction of dwelling unit on an area of 6,000 sq. mtrs. Of plot bearing Survey No.1143, reserved for playground in the Revised Development Plan of 1992, the Slum Rehabilitation Authority, respondent no. 5, has permitted construction by the developer M/s. Integrated Realty Projects.”
The HC order was passed on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by three residents of Khar - Dileep Saptarshi, Robert Wesinger and Sunil - seeking preservation, fencing, demarcation and development of the portion of the land admeasuring 6,000 sq m as RG / PG as per the Development Plan of 1992.
ALSO READFPJ Legal: Mumbai's Esplanade court cancels non-bailable warrant against Param Bir Singh in...
During the hearing senior advocate Gayatri Singh and advocate Ronita Bhattacharya for the petitioners submitted photographs showing the status of construction as on date, which was taken on record.
Additional government pleader Uma Palsuledesai submitted a survey report stating that the said plot of land does not belong to the government as the same had been handed over to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation long back. The HC has taken the report on record too.
The judges have further asked the petitioners to add the developer as respondent to the PIL and directed all the respondents to file their reply affidavits.
The PIL contended that in 2012, the PG area was reduced from 6,000 sq m to 4,802 sq m.
Alleging that the portion of the PG area is being “chipped away” by the authorities, the plea seeks that it be developed as PG for residents. Since August this year, excavation work on the adjoining plot has been undertaken.
The PIL further states that the plot has neither been demarcated nor fenced nor developed as PG despite SC order 26 years ago.
The HC has kept the PIL for further hearing on January 10, 2022.
(To receive our E-paper on whatsapp daily, please click here. We permit sharing of the paper's PDF on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.)