Mumbai: The Supreme Court has refused to grant protection to an unauthorised gurudwara structure inside Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Joggers Park in Lokhandwala, Andheri West.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, on May 22, dismissed an appeal filed by the Sanjha Chulha Guru Ka Langar Trust, which runs the gurudwara.
The trust had moved the apex court challenging the Bombay High Court’s May 2 order, directing the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to demolish the illegal structure if the trust failed to do so in response to a demolition notice. The order was passed in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by five members of the 650-strong Lokhandwala Joggers Park Association.
According to the PIL, a security cabin inside the park was unlawfully converted into a religious structure with a kitchen and storeroom. It alleged that the structure came up during the COVID-19 pandemic, when food distribution by the club secretary’s associates gradually evolved into a permanent langar and gurudwara. The petitioners also raised concerns about food waste being dumped in nearby mangroves and disturbances from loudspeakers.
The BMC had issued notices under Section 351 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act to the Celebration Sports Club, Samarth Nagar Lokhandwala Punjabi Association, and the Sanjha Chulha Trust, asking them to submit valid permissions and ownership documents. After hearing the trust, the civic body passed a demolition order on May 29, 2024.
The High Court had accepted the BMC’s submission that parts of the structure were illegal and that it would be demolished if the trust failed to act. The court also directed the State to provide police protection during the demolition, if necessary.
The trust argued that it had undertaken the construction with permission from MHADA but claimed that the housing body later filed a contradictory affidavit. The High Court clarified that if valid permissions existed, the trust could seek relief from the appropriate forum. However, a city civil court had already denied protection from demolition.
Upholding the High Court’s decision, the Supreme Court said: “We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court. The special leave petition is, accordingly, dismissed.”
