Mumbai: Why has the Bombay High Court questioned this? tall is “powerless” to remove illegal encroachment Structures during hearing of a petition by residents of a dilapidated cess building Kannamvar NagarVikhroli (East).
On Thursday, Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale said, “The petition is an example of a continuing problem in this city.” He noted that on the one hand there are nine commercial structures in an area of 138 square meters on the plot, “each one of them an encroachment”, while on the other hand, the position of the three-storey building, Sai Vihar CHSLThe greenery in the village, with 32 houses, is “clearly dangerous”.
Shown a photograph dated April 27, 2023, by the society’s advocate Sanjeev Sawant, the judges said, “it shows an even more alarming picture”. In August 2022, another bench of the HC had issued a notice and said the petition sought removal of the encroachment. “Nothing has been done since then,” lamented the judges.
MHADA did not file reply and its counsel said that instructions are awaited. “It is impossible to accept that a society which is entitled to repair and reconstruction should be deprived of its rights because of illegalities and illegal and unauthorized encroachments on a part of the project site,” the judges said.
They pointed out that a part layout plan shows “abusive illegal structures”. “We fail to understand why the MHADA is powerless to remove illegal encroachments and structures,” he said, adding that no repair or reconstruction can proceed without the removal of encroachments.
The judges said that the petition has to be monitored. He directed the occupants of the nine structures to be impleaded as respondents and MHADA would issue notice to them stating that whatever application they wish to make should be made in the HC and not before any other court. After their hearing, the judges proposed to order removal of encroachments and fast-track the redevelopment of the society.
“As the matter stands, we do not even know whether this building will withstand another monsoon or not. There is a clear danger to the occupants who have nowhere else to go. They were not even moved to transit accommodation can be done as the process of redevelopment is yet to begin,” he said.
MHADA will also have to state whether it has a rehabilitation policy “for such illegal occupants”. Posting the hearing to June 7, the judges allowed the society to take initial steps towards redevelopment. Pointed out by Sawant that a developer had already been appointed, the judges said that the developer should also be included as a respondent “because it is from the developer that we would be able to ascertain the exact problems at the site more accurately”. .
On Thursday, Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale said, “The petition is an example of a continuing problem in this city.” He noted that on the one hand there are nine commercial structures in an area of 138 square meters on the plot, “each one of them an encroachment”, while on the other hand, the position of the three-storey building, Sai Vihar CHSLThe greenery in the village, with 32 houses, is “clearly dangerous”.
Shown a photograph dated April 27, 2023, by the society’s advocate Sanjeev Sawant, the judges said, “it shows an even more alarming picture”. In August 2022, another bench of the HC had issued a notice and said the petition sought removal of the encroachment. “Nothing has been done since then,” lamented the judges.
MHADA did not file reply and its counsel said that instructions are awaited. “It is impossible to accept that a society which is entitled to repair and reconstruction should be deprived of its rights because of illegalities and illegal and unauthorized encroachments on a part of the project site,” the judges said.
They pointed out that a part layout plan shows “abusive illegal structures”. “We fail to understand why the MHADA is powerless to remove illegal encroachments and structures,” he said, adding that no repair or reconstruction can proceed without the removal of encroachments.
The judges said that the petition has to be monitored. He directed the occupants of the nine structures to be impleaded as respondents and MHADA would issue notice to them stating that whatever application they wish to make should be made in the HC and not before any other court. After their hearing, the judges proposed to order removal of encroachments and fast-track the redevelopment of the society.
“As the matter stands, we do not even know whether this building will withstand another monsoon or not. There is a clear danger to the occupants who have nowhere else to go. They were not even moved to transit accommodation can be done as the process of redevelopment is yet to begin,” he said.
MHADA will also have to state whether it has a rehabilitation policy “for such illegal occupants”. Posting the hearing to June 7, the judges allowed the society to take initial steps towards redevelopment. Pointed out by Sawant that a developer had already been appointed, the judges said that the developer should also be included as a respondent “because it is from the developer that we would be able to ascertain the exact problems at the site more accurately”. .