Supreme Court upheld Bombay HC order directing vacating of unauthorized flats in Tardeo tower

MUMBAI: The Supreme Court upheld a Bombay High Court order and declined to intervene against the well-reasoned ruling, which directed "selfish" residents of the top 18 floors of a 34-storey tower in Tardeo, south Mumbai, that lack an Occupancy Certificate, to vacate their premises in two weeks.

The High Court clarified that such members would be entitled to occupy the flats only after the Occupancy Certificate is granted.On July 15, Justices Girish Kulkarni and Arif Doctor of the High Court also observed the lack of a Fire NOC for the entire high-rise but stayed any civic demolition action and adjourned the issue of the first 16 floors for hearing by two weeks. Aggrieved residents rushed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan on Friday dismissed a special leave petition filed by Willingdon View Cooperative Housing Society seeking to challenge the High Court judgment. The Supreme Court judges said, "We are of the view that we should not interfere with a very well-considered, bold, and lucid judgment delivered by the High Court.""We appreciate the concern expressed by the High Court," Justices Pardiwala and Mahadevan said, adding, "We also appreciate the courage and conviction exhibited by the High Court in taking stern steps against such unauthorised constructions.

Sympathy towards the occupiers of such flats on the ground of hardship and difficulties at the end of the Court would be thoroughly misplaced. At the end of the day, the rule of law must prevail.

"However, the Supreme Court provided some relief to the residents, saying if they wanted time to vacate, they may approach the High Court with such a request. The Supreme Court also directed that the High Court shall "ensure that all its directions are scrupulously complied with.

Necessary legal action shall also be taken against the wrongdoers and erring officials if any."Before the High Court, there was a batch of petitions. There were more than two categories of petitions, the High Court said. There were petitions filed by purchasers/members of the Willingdon View Cooperative Housing Society Limited, who intended to defend the illegal constructions under the garb of regularisation. There was also a writ petition filed by Sunil B. Jhaveri H.U.F., who assailed several illegalities, including the lack of an Occupancy Certificate for floors 17 to 34 and the lack of a Fire NOC, rendering the building illegal. The High Court expressed its reservations about people occupying even floors 1 to 16 but had stayed BMC’s hands in resorting to any demolition under its notices for illegal constructions and posted the issue of the first 16 floors for further hearing on July 29.The High Court order noted that BMC had for years been attempting to take legal actions against these illegalities. "There being no fire NOC, no Occupancy Certificate for floors 17 to 34, itself is glaring. It appears that the persons who are occupying the 34-storey building are least bothered about their own lives. If this be so, how can they be bothered about anybody else, in the event of any untoward incident of any nature taking place? Such an approach, which is wholly contrary to law, cannot be countenanced.

In fact, it would set an example to perpetuate illegalities. It needs to be deprecated."What the High Court said:All the occupants or society members who are illegally occupying floors 17 to 34 are required to vacate their respective premises, and in the event they fail to vacate, the Municipal Corporation needs to take appropriate steps in accordance with the law to get the tenements vacated.We would be justified to say that in the present facts, the flat purchasers who have taken the law into their own hands in occupying construction which has no Occupancy Certificate are a selfish lot, who not only with open eyes are acting contrary to the building regulations but also have means to defeat legal actions being taken by the Municipal Corporation by indulging in several statutory violations, which can never be permitted.— Bombay High Court Justices Girish Kulkarni and Arif Doctor