Observing that the demolition undertaken by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) at the Pali Hill premise of actor Kangana Ranaut on Wednesday morning “did not appear bona fide & smacked of mala fide”, the High Court of Bombay ordered the civic commissioner to stop the action in the afternoon. However, by then, BMC had completed the razing. Taking note of it, High Court rapped BMC for trying to waste the court’s time by resorting to delay tactics to ensure the demolition work was completed. The civic authorities have been asked to explain their stand & conduct through an affidavit at 3pm on Thursday.
A division bench of Justices SJ Kathawalla & RI Chagla while hearing the plea filed by Ranaut through Lawyer Rizwan Siddiqui was informed through video conference that the executive engineer of H-West ward had posted a stop work notice on the outer door of the actor’s premise on Tuesday around 10 am. Siddiqui submitted that the alleged unauthorized construction pointed out in the notice was false & hence, even though Ranaut was out of Mumbai, a response to the notice was filed on Tuesday itself & submitted to the H-West ward office.
Siddiqui told the Court that Ranaut was to arrive on Sept 9 & had sought 7 days to respond to BMC’s stop-work notice. The response, the advocate said, had also called BMC not to misuse its dominant position “to cause prejudice to the petitioner (Ranaut) with any hidden agenda coupled with ulterior motives” as it had given the actor only 24 hours to respond.
When the bench took up the matter for hearing at 12.30 pm, no one appeared for BMC. After 10 minutes, a counsel appeared, alleging she didn't have a copy of the plea filed by Ranaut nor did she have an officer to instruct her with regards to the demolition.
On hearing this, the bench ordered BMC to stop the demolition work & asked BMC’s lawyer to convey it to the municipal commissioner. After 35 minutes of the commencement of the hearing, senior counsel Anil Sakhare appeared & informed the court that BMC officials would answer the queries of the Court.
The officer informed the bench they had undertaken a survey of the premise & found various unauthorized construction in the premise on Sept 7. The officer said he had issued a notice under section 35 (A) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act to Ranaut on the same day & had the stop-work notice posted on the outer door of the premise on Sept 8.
After hearing the submissions the bench held: “We find the above conduct of the MCGM highly deplorable, more so since the MCGM was well aware that a Writ Petition would be filed by the Petitioner before this Court at any time, & an application seeking urgent orders will be moved by the Petitioner, & MCGM had therefore filed a Caveat before this Court. We therefore, informed Senior Advocate Shri Sakhare that such conduct on the part of the MCGM is totally unacceptable to the Court.”
BMC had filed a caveat on Sept 8 in High Court saying that as Ranaut was expected to file a petition, the court should “Let nothing be done unless prior notice is given to the Corporation.”
“Though the manner in which the MCGM has proceeded to commence demolition work of the said Premises, prima facie does not appear to be bonafide & smacks of malafide, we are giving an opportunity to the MCGM to explain its stand / conduct on Affidavit by 3pm tomorrow,” the Bench further observed.
Source Link
