Bombay High Court
Devdas Anantrai Daspai And 13 Ors vs Municipal Corporation Of Gr. Mumbai And ... on 6 January, 2020
Author: B.P.Colabawalla
Bench: S.J. Kathawalla, B.P.Colabawalla
Digitally signed
by Swaroop S.
Swaroop Phadke
S. Date:
Phadke
2020.01.07
17:23:02 1 wp 1437 of 2019.doc
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1437 OF 2019
Devendra M. Agarwal and Ors. ... Petitioners
versus
Municipal Corporation for Greater
Mumbai & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.3513 OF 2019
Devdas Anantrai Daspai and Ors ... Petitioners
versus
Municipal Corporation of Greater
Mumbai & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. Joel Carloz, for Petitioners in WP No.1437 of 2019.
Mr. R.D.Soni with Mr. Chetan Yadav i/by Ram and Co., for Petitioners in WP
No.3513 of 2019.
Mrs. Gauri Jadhav with Ms. Vandana Mahadik, Ms. Sheetal Metkari, for MCGM.
Mr. A.L.Patki, Addl. G.P., for Respondent No.6 in in WP No.1437 of 2019.
Mr. M.A.Sayed, AGP, for Respondent No.5 in WP No.3513 of 2019.
Mr. Pratik Saksaria with Mr. Viraj Maniar, Ms. Yamini Maheshwari i/by Maniar
Srivastava Associates, for Respondent No.5 in WP 1437 of 2019 and for Respondent
No.6 in WP No.3513 of 2019.
Mr. Mohammad Salman, Asst. Professor, IIT Mumbai, present.
CORAM: S.J. KATHAWALLA &
B.P.COLABAWALLA, JJ.
DATE: 6th JANUARY, 2020
P.C.:
1. We have perused the above Writ Petitions and the reliefs sought therein.
2. As far as the order dated 29th November, 2018 passed by the Executive SSP 1/4 1 wp 1437 of 2019.doc Engineer of R/South Ward of Respondent No.1 declaring the building known as "Vidya Niddhi" constructed on the plot bearing CTS No.87, 87A and 87B/1 - 21 of Village Malad, situate at Mathuradas Road, Kandivali (W), Mumbai - 400 067 as dilapidated and unfit for human habitation, we find that the Executive Engineer has passed his order interalia relying on the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) report dated 19th September, 2018 (Exhibit M to the Petition).
3. The conclusions of the TAC, are reproduced hereunder :
"The representative of IIT Mumbai informed during meeting that the building is categorized as C2B by them on the basis of the fact that the building is repairable if the R.C.C. members are recasted. When asked about the cost of repairs, it was agreed by IIT representative that the cost of repairs would be on the higher side & may exceed the cost of reconstruction also. As far as ND tests results are concerned, the same were defended by the MCGM, structural engineer, M/s. Dholakia vis a vis the test results of IIT. The representative from IIT also concurred with the fact explained by M/ s. Dholakia that the structural members of the building are distressed to a great extent and that repairing the same would not be economically viable proposal.
Under the circumstances, it is felt that although the IIT Mumbai had categorized the building as C2B, they have agreed that repairing would not be a viable and desirable option. Further the other two consultants who have substantiated their categorization of C1 with the ND test results. Considering the above facts, TAC is of the SSP 2/4 1 wp 1437 of 2019.doc opinion that the building needs to be vacated and pulled down and it is categorized as C-1."
4. From the above, it is clear that the said conclusions of TAC are interalia based on the statements purportedly made by the representative of IIT Mr.M. Salman. These statements are in complete contradiction of what is stated by Mr. M. Salman in his report which was before the TAC.
5. We had therefore, requested Mr. Salman to remain present. Accordingly, he is today present in Court. He informs the Court that he has not made the aforestated alleged statements/concessions before the TAC and that the recording is incorrect. Without going into the controversy as to whether such statements were made or not and in order to avoid wastage of any further time, we direct the present TAC committee to consider the report of IIT, Mumbai submitted by the tenants, the report of Sardar Patel College of Engineering submitted by the owner/developer and the report of Mr. Nayan Dholakia, Structural Engineer appointed by the TAC committee, and to submit a fresh report qua the subject structure. This exercise shall be completed within a period of two weeks from today. The TAC Committee will follow the guidelines and also the provisions of law as prescribed. Copies of the report shall be handed over to the Advocates for the parties by the learned Advocate for the Corporation.
7. Stand over to 22nd January, 2020 at 3.00 p.m. SSP 3/4 1 wp 1437 of 2019.doc
8. Status quo order granted earlier shall continue for a period of two weeks from today.
( B.P.COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J.)
SSP 4/4