Mumbai Club promises freebies to civic schools

Manoj R Nair
While hearing a petition seeking the demolition of the new indoor stadium at the National Sports Club of India (NSCI) in Worli, the Bombay high court was informed by the elite club that it will offer its swimming pool and sport facilities free of cost to municipal school students.
On December 22, justice RP Sondur Baldota dismissed the petition filed by the Society for Promotion of Equality, Awareness and Rights alleging violation of municipal and environment laws during the construction of the stadium. The petitioner had also asked the court to issue directions to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate the approvals given to the project.
The Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Stadium was built in 1943 as a cycling velodrome. Later, the ground was given to the NSCI on lease by the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC). In 1998, NSCI found that the stadium had become dilapidated and needed reconstruction. An indoor stadium now occupies the site. The NSCI has around 10,000 members in Mumbai and 4,000 in Delhi.
While dismissing the petition, the court agreed there was no violation of existing laws. For instance, though the petitioner alleged that heritage laws were broken, the Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee clarified that the old stadium was not in its list of heritage buildings.
The court also felt that there was no substance in allegations about illegal use of floor space index or that calculation of the total area available for construction on the land was incorrect.
NSCI said that since the petition was filed only on June 18, 2010, there was ‘gross delay’ in challenging its building permissions. On June 20, 2003, the BMC issued a commencement certificate, following a no objection certificate from the fire department. The plan for the stadium was approved on November 29, 2004.The petitioner said there was no undue delay in filing the petition as they had only recently found out about the alleged illegal activities committed by club members.
The court agreed there was delay on the part of the petitioner in filing the petition, since the construction of the stadium had commenced in 2004 and went on for seven years.
Replying to contentions by the petitioner that the stadium was public property, the club said that the facility was never a public recreational ground, and was meant for members, while its use by others was regulated.