Bombay HC orders demolition of 48 high rise buildings
Real Estate

Bombay HC orders demolition of 48 high rise buildings

The Bombay High Court today ordered the Collector of Mumbai Suburban to comply with DGCA instructions to partially destroy 48 high-rise buildings close to the Mumbai International Airport. According to the Bombay High Court's judgement, all areas built to a height of over a particular point must be removed.

The collector was criticised by a division bench consisting of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice M. S. Karnik for attempting to transfer responsibility for demolition to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), and the judges demanded that the collector take action to address this "menace" (obstacles near the airport). The court also recommended that the authorities cut off the water and electricity to any buildings that have received notices for height violations.

A public interest litigation (PIL) concerning the dangers presented by high-rise buildings close to the Mumbai airport was being heard by the high court. The PIL was filed by attorney Yashwant Shenoy. The Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL) notified us that surveys are conducted on a regular basis and that a total of 137 impediments (buildings/structures) were found in 2010. Final orders have been given in 63 of these 137 buildings.

Nine of these have seen the filing of appeals, while six of the buildings have complied. The court was informed that the remaining 48 structures must be removed right away because no compliance or appeal has been made. The bench criticised the collector on Friday for abdicating his duty and claiming in an affidavit submitted to the high court that the BMC should carry out the demolition because it is Mumbai's planning authority.

The HC pointed out that there is no legal prohibition on the collector starting the demolition process and said it is up to the collector to carry out that step. Chief Justice Datta said, "It is the statutory that after final orders are passed for demolition of a structure, it is for the collector to take steps and demolish those structures that are causing an obstacle to aircraft taking off and landing at the airport."

The court stated that the 48 structures were disclosed to the collector's office by the MIAL in November 2017 alone. "An attempt is being made to shift responsibility to the BMC." We are not impressed with such an attitude. "We do not approve of the collector's moving responsibility to the BMC," the court said.

"We direct the collector to file an affidavit indicating the steps proposed to be taken to demolish the 48 structures.” The court directed the posting of the matter for a further hearing on August 22.

The court ruled that the BMC and any other authorities, such as the police, must help the collector with demolition. After the reply affidavit of the collector is submitted on August 22, the bench stated that it will issue instructions with regard to the additional hurdles mentioned by the MIAL from 2010 to the present.

"Those buildings that have been issued notices...start disconnecting their electricity and water supply," Chief Justice Datta remarked. After the 2010 survey, more surveys were conducted, and numerous other structures were identified for demolition, MIAL's Attorney, Vikram Nankani, testified before the court.

See also:
Bombay HC holds AAI’s order to reduce height of JVPD buildings
Bombay HC asks state to ensure no deaths due to building collapses


The Bombay High Court today ordered the Collector of Mumbai Suburban to comply with DGCA instructions to partially destroy 48 high-rise buildings close to the Mumbai International Airport. According to the Bombay High Court's judgement, all areas built to a height of over a particular point must be removed. The collector was criticised by a division bench consisting of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice M. S. Karnik for attempting to transfer responsibility for demolition to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), and the judges demanded that the collector take action to address this menace (obstacles near the airport). The court also recommended that the authorities cut off the water and electricity to any buildings that have received notices for height violations. A public interest litigation (PIL) concerning the dangers presented by high-rise buildings close to the Mumbai airport was being heard by the high court. The PIL was filed by attorney Yashwant Shenoy. The Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL) notified us that surveys are conducted on a regular basis and that a total of 137 impediments (buildings/structures) were found in 2010. Final orders have been given in 63 of these 137 buildings. Nine of these have seen the filing of appeals, while six of the buildings have complied. The court was informed that the remaining 48 structures must be removed right away because no compliance or appeal has been made. The bench criticised the collector on Friday for abdicating his duty and claiming in an affidavit submitted to the high court that the BMC should carry out the demolition because it is Mumbai's planning authority. The HC pointed out that there is no legal prohibition on the collector starting the demolition process and said it is up to the collector to carry out that step. Chief Justice Datta said, It is the statutory that after final orders are passed for demolition of a structure, it is for the collector to take steps and demolish those structures that are causing an obstacle to aircraft taking off and landing at the airport. The court stated that the 48 structures were disclosed to the collector's office by the MIAL in November 2017 alone. An attempt is being made to shift responsibility to the BMC. We are not impressed with such an attitude. We do not approve of the collector's moving responsibility to the BMC, the court said. We direct the collector to file an affidavit indicating the steps proposed to be taken to demolish the 48 structures.” The court directed the posting of the matter for a further hearing on August 22. The court ruled that the BMC and any other authorities, such as the police, must help the collector with demolition. After the reply affidavit of the collector is submitted on August 22, the bench stated that it will issue instructions with regard to the additional hurdles mentioned by the MIAL from 2010 to the present. Those buildings that have been issued notices...start disconnecting their electricity and water supply, Chief Justice Datta remarked. After the 2010 survey, more surveys were conducted, and numerous other structures were identified for demolition, MIAL's Attorney, Vikram Nankani, testified before the court. See also: Bombay HC holds AAI’s order to reduce height of JVPD buildingsBombay HC asks state to ensure no deaths due to building collapses

Next Story
Equipment

Handling concrete better

Efficiently handling the transportation and placement of concrete is essential to help maintain the quality of construction, meet project timelines by minimising downtimes, and reduce costs – by 5 to 15 per cent, according to Sandeep Jain, Director, Arkade Developers. CW explores what the efficient handling of concrete entails.Select wellFirst, a word on choosing the right equipment, such as a mixer with a capacity aligned to the volume required onsite, from Vaibhav Kulkarni, Concrete Expert. “An overly large mixer will increase the idle time (and cost), while one that ..

Next Story
Real Estate

Elevated floors!

Raised access flooring, also called false flooring, is a less common interiors feature than false ceilings, but it has as many uses – if not more.A raised floor is a modular panel installed above the structural floor. The space beneath the raised flooring is typically used to accommodate utilities such as electrical cables, plumbing and HVAC systems. And so, raised flooring is usually associated with buildings with heavy cabling and precise air distribution needs, such as data centres.That said, CW interacted with designers and architects and discovered that false flooring can come in handy ..

Next Story
Infrastructure Urban

The Variation Challenge

A variation or change in scope clause is defined in construction contracts to take care of situations arising from change in the defined scope of work. Such changes may arise due to factors such as additions or deletions in the scope of work, modifications in the type, grade or specifications of materials, alterations in specifications or drawings, and acts or omissions of other contractors. Further, ineffective planning, inadequate investigations or surveys and requests from the employer or those within the project’s area of influence can contribute to changes in the scope of work. Ext..

Advertisement

Advertisement

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get daily newsletters around different themes from Construction world.

STAY CONNECTED

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Talk to us?