Mumbai, Dec 13: Expressing concern over what it termed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation’s (BMC) frequent failure to follow its own rules, the Bombay High Court has directed the civic body to place on record comprehensive details of illegal structures regularised in Mumbai over the past five years, including the number of garages that were granted regularisation during the period.
The court said such lapses often result in “unwarranted litigation” being contested at public cost and require the attention of higher authorities.
Petition Over Garage Area in Redevelopment
A bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe passed the order on December 10 while hearing a petition filed by Ramesh Dattatray Pathak, who alleged that the BMC had refused to recognise the area of a garage while considering redevelopment of a building.
Pathak claimed that the garage, which he had been using as a commercial office, entitled him to permanent alternative accommodation in the redeveloped premises.
Argument on DCPR Provisions
The petitioner’s advocates submitted that the garage area, though originally meant for parking, was being used commercially and was required to be included in the redevelopment plan under Regulation 33(7) of the Development Control and Promotion Regulations (DCPR) for Greater Mumbai, 2034.
Court Notes Pattern in Old Buildings
The bench observed that many old buildings in Mumbai from an “earlier era” had garages which were later used for other purposes, and a consistent view by the BMC would prevent similar disputes in future redevelopment projects.
BMC Rejected Regularisation Plea
On December 9, however, the BMC’s Executive Engineer (Building Proposal) rejected Pathak’s application, holding that the commercial use of the garage was unauthorised.
It blamed the petitioner for not seeking regularisation before redevelopment and ruled out any post-facto approval or regularisation on payment of penalty.
HC Finds Fault With Civic Body’s Approach
The High Court found fault with this approach, observing that the BMC’s order had “completely overlooked the correct factual position on subject matter” as recorded in earlier court orders. It further noted that there was nothing on record to show that the municipal commissioner had applied his mind to the facts while approving the decision.
“We are of the opinion that in the midst of development, after the building had been demolished, shifting the burden upon the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had not applied for regularisation at the relevant time, which could have been then granted, prima facie is not a justified/reasonable approach on the part of the Executive Engineer. The Municipal Commissioner completely overlooked this position,” the bench said.
Details of Regularised Structures Sought
Stating that it was left with “no alternative”, the court directed the competent officer to file an affidavit disclosing how many garages in Mumbai had been granted regularisation in the last five years.
It also sought details of all illegal structures regularised by the BMC during the same period. “The affidavit shall contain all particulars, including the area of the structures so regularised, in a tabular format,” the court directed, granting two weeks’ time.
Also Watch:
Strong Observations on BMC Functioning
The bench also made strong observations on the civic body’s functioning, saying, “We are also constrained to observe that the municipal corporation in a large number of cases do not adhere to the rules and the law, resulting in generation of unwarranted litigation, before this Court being contested at public costs when there are glaring illegalities, which require far greater attention. Comparatively this is a very small case.”
Next Hearing on December 24
The HC has kept the matter for further hearing on December 24.
To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
