SC refuses to stay HC order: Tardeo high-rise residents told to vacate illegal upper floors
The residents, who have been living in flats from the 17th to 34th floor of the 34-storey building for over a decade, were earlier ordered by the Bombay High Court to vacate within two weeks. The court found the occupation illegal, citing grave violations of municipal and fire safety regulations.
Rejecting the housing society's plea, the Supreme Court bench of justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan upheld the High Court's ruling. 'At the end of the day, the rule of law must prevail,' the judges said, calling the High Court's order 'very well considered, bold and lucid.' They also praised the court's 'courage and conviction' in tackling unauthorised constructions.
Construction of the building commenced in 1990, and flat owners started occupying their respective premises from 2008. As of now, 50 of the 62 flats in the high-rise are occupied. The apex court observed that showing sympathy to such illegal occupants would be 'thoroughly misplaced' and stressed that legal norms must be respected to ensure public safety. The court dismissed the society's special leave petition and directed that the High Court's instructions be strictly followed. It also said appropriate legal action must be taken against any erring officials or wrongdoers.
The Bombay High Court's order, passed on July 21 by justices G S Kulkarni and Arif S Doctor, stemmed from a petition filed by Sunil B Zaveri, a resident of the same building. Zaveri flagged multiple irregularities in the construction, including the absence of a fire safety NOC and an OC for the upper floors. The court noted that the illegal flats pose a risk to human life and violate both the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act and the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966.
While some residents filed intervention pleas opposing the petition, the High Court held that such occupation was a 'brazen illegality'. 'Accepting such submissions would render the entire statutory regime meaningless,' the court said, warning that it would amount to legalising lawlessness in urban construction.
The housing society had argued that it was taking steps to regularise not just the lower 16 floors — for which approvals are reportedly being pursued — but also the upper 18 floors. It urged the court to let the families continue staying on humanitarian grounds while applications for regularisation were processed.
However, the High Court dismissed this plea, observing that residential occupancy without a valid OC cannot be justified, regardless of the number of years the flats have been in use. The court directed the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to initiate legal action if the residents failed to vacate within the stipulated time.
The Supreme Court has allowed the society to approach the High Court to seek more time for vacating the flats. The High Court has scheduled the next hearing in the matter for August 6.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Supreme Court cancels DHFL's Dheeraj Wadhawan's bail, orders surrender in 2 weeks
The Supreme Court on Tuesday cancelled the bail granted to former Dewan Housing Finance Limited (DHFL) promoter Dheeraj Wadhawan in a multi-crore loan scam case. The bail, initially granted by the Delhi High Court on medical grounds, was revoked after the Supreme Court reviewed a report from the medical September 9, 2024, Wadhawan was granted bail by the Delhi High Court, which ruled that he qualified as a 'sick person,' warranting his release on medical grounds. However, a recent assessment by the Supreme Court led to a reversal of this decision. Wadhawan has been directed to surrender within two weeks, with assurances that jail authorities will provide the necessary medical Wadhawan, alongside his brother Kapil, was arrested in connection with a significant financial fraud case. The two were accused of defrauding a consortium of 17 banks, amounting to Rs 34,000 crore, marking it as one of the largest bank loan scams in India. The Wadhawan brothers were charged with engaging in a criminal conspiracy, misappropriation of public funds, and breach of trust. Allegations include manipulating records and diverting funds through circular transactions to generate personal media reports about fund diversion in January 2019, DHFL came under scrutiny. A consortium of banks appointed KPMG to conduct an audit, revealing fund diversions disguised as loans to DHFL-linked entities. The audit unveiled that Rs 29,100 crore was disbursed to 66 entities associated with DHFL promoters, with a significant portion of these funds invested in land and being arrested in 2022, Dheeraj Wadhawan was presented before a special court in Mumbai, leading to his judicial custody. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had filed charges citing financial irregularities and fund diversions within DHFL, leading to the eventual judicial proceedings against the Wadhawan brothers.- EndsMust Watch
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
SC rejects plea challenging declaration of ISIS as terrorist organisation
The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a petition challenging two government notifications declaring the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and associated ideological expressions as terrorist organisations under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), 1967. A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi was hearing the petition filed by Saquib Abdul Hamid Nachan. Petitioner alleged wrongful arrest The petitioner claimed that he and his son were wrongfully arrested for alleged links to ISIS. The bench, however, noted that these grievances could only be addressed through appropriate proceedings before the competent criminal court. The court also clarified that it was not inclined to entertain a blanket challenge to the government notifications dated February 2015 and June 2018, issued under Section 35 of the UAPA. Amicus curiae, senior advocate Mukta Gupta, submitted that the two notifications violated the petitioner's fundamental right under Article 25 of the Constitution by misinterpreting religious terms such as 'caliphate' and 'jihad', equating them with terrorism. She argued that the declarations lacked supporting material or adherence to any procedure akin to that prescribed for declaring 'unlawful associations' under Section 3 of the UAPA. 'He says the word 'caliphate' is wrongly interpreted. That violates his fundamental right of religion. He has given substantial portions indicating what, according to the Quran, is the meaning of caliphate and jihad,' Gupta submitted. However, the bench rejected this argument, stating that such terms must be interpreted in the context of the alleged terrorist activity and not purely from a religious or scriptural standpoint. 'When the notification used the word 'caliphate', it is in relation to terrorist activity. So it has to be read in that context,' Justice Bagchi observed. No mechanism to review terrorist declarations under Section 35 Gupta further highlighted that while the UAPA provides for a tribunal to review the banning of unlawful associations, there is no equivalent review mechanism under Section 35, which governs the designation of terrorist organisations. She also informed the court that the petitioner had been arrested after filing the writ petition, and that his son had previously been detained by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) on similar allegations. In response, Justice Surya Kant noted that the petitioner could pursue bail or other legal remedies through the appropriate criminal forum. 'He can always avail his remedy before the appropriate forum,' he said. Plea not a constitutional challenge The bench concluded that the petition appeared to be an attempt to secure relief in ongoing individual criminal proceedings, rather than a genuine constitutional challenge to the notifications. 'It seems to us that instead of a challenge to the impugned notifications, the remedy for the petitioner and his son lies in approaching the appropriate forum,' the court said in its order, while disposing of the petition.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Elgar Parishad case: Court junks Navlakhas plea seeking to live in Delhi
Mumbai, Aug 5 (PTI) A special NIA court here has refused permission to activist Gautam Navlakha, an accused in the Elgar Parishad-Maoist links case, to live in Delhi for a brief period while rebuking him for seeking the same relief repeatedly. In the order passed on August 1, judge C S Baviskar said Navlakha, ordered to stay in Mumbai as part of his bail condition, had ingeniously found the trick to file multiple applications seeking same reliefs. The order copy became available on Tuesday. In November 2024, the special court for National Investigation Agency cases had granted him permission to stay in Delhi for two months. In his latest application, Navlakha relied on this order while seeking permission to live in Delhi again for 45 days. 'It is not at all expected. I recapitulate, the thing you shall not do directly, cannot do even indirectly," the court said in the order. While rejecting the application, it was restraining itself from imposing cost on Navlakha, it added. The earlier permission to live in Delhi for two months did not give him the license to claim the same liberty repeatedly, the court said. The Bombay High Court, while granting Navlakha bail, had laid down that he shall remain in Mumbai considering the seriousness of the offences in this case, the special court said. 'The applicant/accused may show total disregard towards the expectations of the High Court in its order that he should reside within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court. However, the directions of the High Court are happily binding on this Court and this Court has to follow it scrupulously," the order said. Navlakha (72), a permanent resident of Delhi, was arrested in the case in April 2020. He was granted bail in 2024. The case relates to alleged inflammatory speeches made at the Elgar Parishad conclave held in Pune on December 31, 2017, which police claimed triggered violence the next day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial near Pune. Sixteen activists were arrested in the case. PTI SP KRK view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
