Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

                                          (25)                    wp-12527-2021.


6.              The        learned        counsel         for        petitioners

further submits that, the impugned notices issued for eviction on the ground that the structures are in dilapidated condition suffer from legal infirmities and the same does not have any binding effect. The learned counsel relies upon the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in case of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2014) 6 Bombay CR 860 and another judgment in case of Mr. Jaswant Shivlal Chandarana and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. in Writ Petition No.9757/2013 with connected writ petitions dated July 18, 2017. The learned counsel submits that, the Division Bench of this Court in the said judgments has laid down the policy and guidelines for conducting structural audit. The said judgment is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. The policy and guidelines under the said judgment are applicable to the owner as well as the occupants. According to the said judgment the Corporation has to act in accordance with law and the Corporation before classifying a building under category C-1, is required to conduct its own independent inspection and assessment with the help of the Engineers of their Department and carry out a survey of such buildings. The report pursuant to the Structural Audit shall be taken into account. If the owners and/or the occupants bring conflicting reports on the status of the building, the Corporation is required to refer the matter to (26) wp-12527-2021.

Technical Advisory Committee. In the present case, the petitioners have placed on record the structural audit report of the Government approved registered Structural Engineer/Auditor showing that, the structures are perfectly habitable and some structures only require minor repairs.

7. The learned counsel submits that, the guidelines laid down in the said judgment have been flouted by the respondents. No specific test like ultrasonic pulse velocity test, rebound hammer test, half cell potential test, carbonation depth test, core test, chemical analysis, cement aggregate ratio are conducted before issuing the notices. More over, the rights of the occupants are not affected by the demolition carried out by the Corporation of dilapidated building. Such tenements or occupiers would still be entitled to occupy the premises after reconstruction of building. The officers of the respondents, even did not enter into the premises and have given the reports without even inspecting it from inside. In view of that, the said notices are illegal.

15. According to the learned senior Advocate, all the tenements are old tenements, constructed almost 70 years back. The basement, slabs, walls, lintels, plaster, concrete of all the structures have deteriorated. The structural audit has been conducted by the Government College of Engineering. The Department of Applied Mechanics, Government College of Engineering, Aurangabad personally inspected all 338 tenements physically and submitted the structural audit report alongwith photographs of the tenements. They are placed on record. As per the structural audit report, there is corrosion of reinforcement in the said tenements. The structures are found to be in highly damaged condition and not fit for (32) wp-12527-2021.

removed and the dilapidated structures demolished in larger public interest.

16. The learned senior Advocate submits that, the tenements are load bearing structures. There are no RCC columns and beams in the said structures. The structural audit team was given access to all the tenements by the concerned residents for the purpose of inspection. The team has followed the methodology of visual observation and also have conducted rebound hammer test and the observations have been recorded which is clarified in the report itself. It has been opined that, the serviceability of all these buildings are seriously affected. The structural inspection report submitted by petitioners are totally inconsistent and irrelevant. They cannot be considered. According to the learned senior counsel, petitioners are not legitimate owners nor the legitimate occupiers of the tenements. They are required to vacate the same. The petition deserves to be dismissed.