Wednesday, December 17, 2025 | 02:45 AM ISTहिंदी में पढें
Business Standard
Notification Icon
userprofile IconSearch

Despite notices by the civic body under section 354 of the Act to the society as well as individual members, some occupants refused to vacate the premises on the ground that the Registrar had not complied with certain procedures of the redevelopment and unless that was done they would not vacate.

Image

Press Trust of India
The Corporation first issued notice in August 2007 to carry out structural repairs but when the occupants did not vacate, it issued another notice in March 2008 to pull down the structures. Yet another notice was served on the Society in March 2012. The BMC sought help from police which was of the view that some members of the society are not vacating the premises and it would not be advisable to force them to leave the premises to facilitate the demolition of the buildings despite its dangerous condition. After the civic body gave final notice to the Society and individual occupants asking the members to vacate the buildings immediately, the Corporation as well as Police did not take the notices to their logical end on an erroneous understanding that they had no powers to demolish structures. Being aggrieved, the Society approached the Bombay High Court which opined that the structures should be pulled down because some portion had already collapsed and the remaining buildings had become vulnerable and likely to collapse any point of time.
 

Don't miss the most important news and views of the day. Get them on our Telegram channel

First Published: Feb 09 2013 | 3:30 PM IST

Explore News