Home »  News »  India »  Mumbai

Illegal structures info on Net likely

Monday, 3 December 2012 - 11:04pm IST | Place: Mumbai | Agency: dna

HC may soon direct BMC to upload details of action taken against such devpts on its website.

Citizens might soon be able to know what action has the municipal corporation taken on complaints against illegal developments in their areas at the click of the mouse.

The Bombay high court, on Monday, hinted that it would direct the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to set up an online system for the citizens to access such information.

“The court would give directions to the BMC to upload on its official website details of the notices issued by it under sections 351 and 354 of the MMC Act for demolition of illegal structures and regularly update the website with the action taken on them,” said a division bench of justice DY Chandrachud and justice AA Sayyed.

The bench was hearing a public interest litigation filed by the Catholic Residents’ Organisation highlighting the connivance of civic officials and an illegal Chinese stall owner in Bandra.

The petition claimed that Dattarey Kambli had illegally set up a Chinese stall in Bandra and though the BMC issued him a show-cause notice under section 351of the MMC Act in October 2011, after repeated complaints, he continued his business.

The group even regularly made representations to the BMC to no avail as  Kambli built a concrete structure disturbing the traffic flow on the busy road near the Mount Mary steps. The group again complaint to the BMC, who then issued a partial demolition order, which was carried out.

But Kambli again re-constructed the structure, the group claimed.
Advocate Uday Warunjikar, appearing for the group, said: “The BMC issues a number of notices to illegal occupants and those who have done illegal construction, but there is hardly any know how of what happens after that. The citizens who complains do not know the fate of their complaint.”

The court directed the BMC and the state government to file their replies and adjourning the matter till December 17.

Jump to comments

Recommended Content