Mumbai: The Bombay High Court pulled up the BMC on Friday, saying its ‘constant delay’ in filing replies was preventing the court from deciding several important cases, especially those related to dilapidated buildings that need to be demolished. “Tomorrow if any building collapses in Mumbai, both the BMC and the court will be equally responsible for it,” a Bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and M.S. Karnik observed.
Taking note of the recent incidents of building collapse in the city and the loss of lives, the court said it is often unable to order the demolition of a dilapidated building only because the BMC is “unprepared” to present its side of arguments, or because it has failed to file its reply in the case.
“So many developers come to us seeking protection from demolition, and we are forced to grant them relief because either your [BMC] counsel has no idea of the case and has no instructions from your officers, or because you have not filed your reply. In several cases like these, the BMC is yet to file its reply since 2012,” the Bench said.
It also directed the BMC Commissioner to take strict action against officers who knowingly issued erroneous structural audit reports for dilapidated buildings. The court said in several cases of developers seeking protection from demolition, it had noticed that there were “always two contradictory structural audit reports.”
The Bench said, “One party brings a report saying the building is dilapidated and needs to be demolished, while the other party brings in a report stating that the building is totally fine. It’s apparent, therefore, that some of your structure audit officers are knowingly issuing false reports. You must take cognisance of this and initiate strict action against the erring officers”.
The observations came while the bench was hearing an explanation from civic chief Ajoy Mehta on the BMC’s ‘lackadaisical’ approach to important cases, in which it is a party. Mr. Mehta, who was present in court in compliance with the summons issued to him last week, blamed the vast area under BMC’s jurisdiction and inadequate staff in its law department for the same. He said the civic body currently has just 89 law officers to handle 90,000 ongoing cases in various courts in the city and the apex court. “While 74 law officers handle court cases, the other 15 handle office work. On any given day, the civic body has to tackle around 1,500 cases,” Mr. Mehta said.
The court, however, said this was no excuse for the performance of the BMC’s lawyers in court. It also reminded Mr. Mehta that the BMC was one of the richest in the country and had a budget larger than that of several Indian states. Justice Gavai suggested the civic body take a cue from the State government, that probably deals with an equal amount of litigation, by appointing a panel of lawyers to deal exclusively with the cases pending in the high court. “The law officers on your payroll can be assigned cases in lower courts. This will result in continuity and better efficiency,” Justice Gavai said.
Mr. Mehta, in turn, submitted that the BMC is already in the process of streamlining its law department. He said BMC’s law department’s manpower will be increased soon and the civic body now has in place an integrated online system to keep track of pending litigation, lawyers appointed, case status and money spent on the same.