Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4 Then, on receipt of such notice, the Petitioners, who are occupiers of the building, approached the structural consultant M/s Sachdev and Associates. They are stated to be Consulting Civil Engineers and Structural Consultants. They have submitted a report styled as 'Structural Audit Report' on 18 th April, 2015 opining that the building should be repaired to eliminate the minor defects and to enhance the life of the building and that the repair cost of the building is only Rs.60/- per square

913.wpl.3139.18.doc feet.

5 Pertinently, no copy of this report is annexed to the Petition. However, the Petitioners themselves in paragraph 5 say that there were two different opinions. The reports were placed before a Technical Advisory Committee. The Petitioners were called upon, together with Respondent No.7, to submit a fresh Structural Audit Report and that was also done by the Petitioners. A copy of that report is at Exhibit-D. The owner of the property- Respondent No.7 also submitted his Structural Audit Report. 6 The Petitioners in paragraphs 8 and 9 state as under:-

13 It is on all these safeguards, in the present case, the

913.wpl.3139.18.doc Commissioner's satisfaction is that, the building which is occupied by the Petitioners, is required to be pulled down. Now, according to the Petitioners this satisfaction is sought to be assailed on permissible grounds and enabling us to exercise our powers of judicial review.

14 Mr. Jadhav would submit that in this case the structure is not at all dangerous or unsafe for human habitation. The structure is capable of being repaired. If repairs are carried out, there is no danger and then the Petitioners can safely occupy the structure or the portion thereof. He, therefore, submits that the Technical Advisory Committee and the Municipal Commissioner failed to follow the guidelines laid down by this Court in its order dated 23 rd June, 2014 in Writ Petition (L) No.1135 of 2014 (Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, through the Municipal Commissioner v/s State of Maharashtra and Others). Mr. Jadhav would submit that the Committee ought to have appreciated the fact that the Corporation neither conducted any independent inspection and assessment of the building with the help of their own Engineers nor carried out any survey thereof by taking on record the structural audit reports. Further, the structural audit report submitted by the Petitioners

17 In the affidavit of the Municipal Corporation, in answer to this Petition, it is stated as under:-

"3.I say that in this case letter dt.28.10.2012 is received from M/s Sri Sai Nidhi Realtors Pvt Ltd, regarding dangerous condition of the said building accompanying with structural audit report which is carried out by M/s S. P. Civil Engineers Pvt Ltd.
4.I say that the consultant M/s. S. P. Civil Engineers Pvt Ltd, has submitted their audit report with 'NDT' report i.e. ultrasonic pulse velocity test half cell potential test. In the said report it is mentioned that "the concrete grade is of doubtful quality and which indicate that the structures are beyond repair".