Vasant Sagar PIL is without merit: BMC

Permissions for the Vasant Sagar project at Churchgate have been given as per rules, and a public interest litigation filed against it is without any merit. In an affidavit to the Bombay High Court, BMC has shot down the petition and urged the court to dismiss the PIL. “The permissions have been given by BMC in accordance with the law, as per the provisions of DC Rules, 1967,” said Rajeev Kuknur, Chief Engineer (Development Plan), BMC, in his affidavit to HC.

The corporation filed the affidavit on August 28, in response to the interim relief granted by HC to the Federation of Churchgate Residents. The interim relief was granted on July 30 in the absence of the civic counsel, and the corporation now seeks dismissal of the PIL.

Rejecting the charge by the petitioners that the project is a threat to the heritage precinct, Kuknur said in the affidavit that though the heritage status itself is still proposed, all norms have been adhered to while granting permissions. “The DC regulations modified in September 2009 by the state government say that provisions of regulation 67 are applicable only to grade I and II category of heritage buildings for reconstruction and redevelopment. The building is neither grade I or II, and for precincts as a whole or Grade III category buildings, a special permission from municipal commissioner suffices,” said Kuknur, adding that accordingly, this permission was granted on April 16, 2012 and the building in question complies with regulations dealing with heritage precincts.

The Vasant Sagar project got underway in 2009 after BMC declared the old building dilapidated on the basis of inspections and reports of two licensed surveyors. Redevelopment was permissible under rule 10(b) of DCR and since the new area was 3418 square metres – at an FSI of 2.25 – the reconstruction plan was approved in accordance with applicable law. According to the affidavit, since the construction involved is less than 20,000 square metres of built-up area, the same has been approved by Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority and not the MoEF. “In fact, amended plans for building up to a height of 61.30 metres, submitted on 21 June 2010 were rejected on July 2, 2010 and an amended plan was submitted in August 2011 for 58 metres, which was eventually approved on May 4, 2012,”Kuknur stated. 

The plot falls in proposed Marine Drive precinct as per the public notice of 12 July 1999, where suggestions and objections were invited, but the due procedure is not yet complete and it is still ‘proposed’ Marine Drive precinct and not a listed precinct under regulation 67 of DCR.

The BMC affidavit maintained that though the NOC issued by Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority suggests the nod of Mumbai Heritage Conservation Committee, no permission of heritage committee is required in respect of reconstruction of old building under DCR.

The senior civic official’s submission before HC upholds the stand taken by erstwhile municipal commissioner Subodh Kumar, during whose tenure the project was cleared. “The attempt to link the Vasant Sagar project to my joining the Essel Group after retirement was a motivated campaign,” said Subodh Kumar, adding that his decision on Vasant Sagar was in accordance with the law. 

Though sanction was sought for Vasant Sagar to reach a total height of 67.85 metres, Subodh Kumar did not allow that, even via special permission. He instead sanctioned the height of the building upto 58 metres, without a no-objection certificate from the MHCC, according to Kuknur's petition. "Instead of giving special permission on case-to-case basis, he approved the present case along with policy for allowing height...in a very judicious manner," the affidavit said. "Keeping the Art Deco character of the front line buildings on Marine Drive in mind, he decided, as a general policy, to allow the height of any building to be redeveloped in the proposed heritage precinct in a manner, so as not to obstruct the line of sight of a person standing on the seaside promenade of Marine Drive. Accordingly, total height of building...has been permitted only 58 metres against 67.85 metres requested," the affidavit says.