Bombay High Court Allows Petition Against Unauthorized Construction in Residential Building, Directs MCGM to Take Action. Court holds that municipal authorities cannot abdicate their statutory duty to enforce building regulations and must act against illegal constructions that threaten safety and welfare of residents.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Chandralok People Welfare Association, a residents' welfare association of Chandralok Building in Goregaon (West), Mumbai, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions against the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) and other respondents to take action against unauthorized construction allegedly carried out by respondent nos. 6 to 9. The petitioner contended that the respondents had carried out illegal alterations and additions in the building, including converting a common passage into a room and constructing additional floors without approval, which posed a serious threat to the safety and structural integrity of the building. The petitioner had made several complaints to the MCGM, but no action was taken. The MCGM, in its affidavit, admitted that the construction was unauthorized but claimed that it had issued a notice under Section 354 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, and that further action was being taken. However, the court noted that the MCGM had not actually demolished the unauthorized construction or taken any effective steps. The court observed that the MCGM has a statutory duty under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, to prevent and remove unauthorized constructions, and that it cannot abdicate this duty. The court held that the MCGM must act promptly and effectively against illegal constructions, and that the court can issue a writ of mandamus to compel the MCGM to perform its duty. The court directed the MCGM to take appropriate action against the unauthorized construction within a specified time frame and to report compliance. The court also directed the police to provide necessary assistance to the MCGM. The petition was allowed with costs.

Headnote

A) Municipal Law - Unauthorized Construction - Statutory Duty of MCGM - Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, Sections 351, 354, 488 - The court considered whether the MCGM has a duty to act against unauthorized construction that poses a risk to residents' safety. Held that the MCGM cannot abdicate its statutory duty and must take appropriate action against illegal constructions, as failure to do so would undermine the rule of law and endanger public safety (Paras 1-30).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) is obligated to take action against unauthorized construction in a residential building, and whether the court can direct the MCGM to perform its statutory duty.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the petition, directing MCGM to take appropriate action against the unauthorized construction within a specified time frame, with police assistance if needed, and to report compliance. Costs were awarded to the petitioner.

Law Points

  • Statutory duty of municipal authorities
  • unauthorized construction
  • enforcement of building regulations
  • public safety
  • writ jurisdiction
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (BOM) (10) 104

WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 17361 OF 2023

2023-10-18

GS Patel, Kamal Khata

2023:BHC-OS:12498

Abhishek Sawant, Vaishali Sanghavi, Ameet Mehta, Aniket Shendekar, Amit Shastri, Kunal Waghmare, Piyush Raheja

Chandralok People Welfare Association

State of Maharashtra, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Municipal Commissioner, Assistant Municipal Commissioner, Executive Engineer, Vinay Ashok Dwivedi, Vivek Ashok Dubey, Vishal Ashok Dubey, Shamina Pramod Jaykar

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions against MCGM to take action against unauthorized construction.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing MCGM to demolish unauthorized construction and ensure compliance with building regulations.

Filing Reason

Unauthorized construction in the building allegedly carried out by respondent nos. 6 to 9, posing safety risks, and inaction by MCGM despite complaints.

Issues

Whether MCGM has a statutory duty to act against unauthorized construction? Whether the court can direct MCGM to perform its duty under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that MCGM failed to take action despite repeated complaints, and that the unauthorized construction is illegal and dangerous. MCGM submitted that it had issued a notice under Section 354 and was taking steps, but the court found the action insufficient. Respondent nos. 6 to 8 denied the allegations and claimed that the construction was not unauthorized.

Ratio Decidendi

Municipal authorities have a statutory duty under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, to prevent and remove unauthorized constructions. They cannot abdicate this duty, and the court can issue a writ of mandamus to compel performance of this duty.

Judgment Excerpts

There are two Affidavits in Reply by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (“MCGM”) and an Affidavit in Reply by the 6th Respondent (“Vinay Dwivedi”) on behalf of himself and Respondent Nos 7 & 8. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The MCGM and respondent nos. 6 to 8 filed affidavits in reply. The court heard the matter and delivered judgment on 18th October 2023.

Acts & Sections

  • Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888: 351, 354, 488
  • Constitution of India: 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Petition Against Unauthorized Construction in Residential Building, Directs MCGM to Take Action. Court holds that municipal authorities cannot abdicate their statutory duty to enforce building regulations and must act against...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Ex-Post Facto Approval of Charge Memorandum in Disciplinary Proceedings. The Court held that a charge memorandum issued without prior approval of the disciplinary authority can be validated by subsequent ex-post facto approval u...