Parking troubles on Bhulabhai Desai Road will soon be a thing of the past, as the Bombay High Court on Thursday gave its approval for constructing of a multi-storey mechanical parking tower there.
MUMBAI: Parking troubles on Bhulabhai Desai Road will soon be a thing of the past, as the Bombay High Court on Thursday gave its approval for constructing of a multi-storey mechanical parking tower there.
The court dismissed a PIL filed by the Breach Candy Residents’ Association, placing on record that there was no violation of the Development Control Regulation (DCR) or the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) by the developers, Akruti Nirman, while constructing the tower, which will come up near Mahalaxmi Temple. The court also held that there was an enormous delay on the part of the petitioners to file the PIL.
The BMC had invited tenders for the development of the plot on April 18, 2002, and Akruti Nirman’s tender was accepted on April 21, 2002, a fact that was widely publicised. The PIL, however, was filed only in May 2006, after seven storeys of the parking tower had been completed, and the developer had spent close to Rs4 crore on the project.
A division bench of Chief Justice HS Bedi and Justice VM Kanade, in their order, quoted a Supreme Court ruling in the Narmada Bachao Andolan case, stating: “If a project is undertaken and the same is challenged after its execution has commenced, it should be thrown out of the very threshold on the ground of laches (delay).”
The Breach Candy Residents Association had challenged the contract executed between the BMC and the developers, including the sanctions for construction of the parking tower and a department store on a plot adjacent to the Mahalaxmi temple, on the seaward side of Bhulabhai Desai Road.
The plot was owned by the state government, and was transferred to the BMC in 1939 for the construction of a public garden or a play ground.
The petitioners contended that the construction of the parking tower and the department store is a violation of the DCR as permissible limits of construction in a CRZ is 22 meters and the BMC has leased out 50 meters to private builders for construction of the parking tower.
The petitioner’s advocate DJ Khambatta also argued that the plot was earmarked as a parking lot, welfare centre and a public toilet but its purpose was defeated as the BMC had also sanctioned the construction of a department store on the plot.
Senior advocate Janak Dwarkadas who appeared for the developers, however, pointed out that provisions under DCR said that merely because a part of the construction was used for an ancillary purpose, the entire construction does not become illegal.
The court observed that, prima facie there was no violation of DCR as the department store being constructed was below 22 meters that is permissible under DCR. Also the parking tower with a height of 50 meters was permissible under DCR as it was for public use.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}