Mumbai: Rebuking BMC for its general body clearing the proposal to change the reservation of Bandra’s Neville D’souza Football Ground to an exhibition centre despite its oral assurance earlier that it would not take such steps, Bombay HC on Thursday said it was a “bigger problem” as the court’s majesty was at stake.“If elected people or authorities are going to jeer at the courts, it is something bad,” said Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad. BMC’s advocate said civic chief Ashwini Bhide did not know “what had transpired in court” when the proposal was placed before the general body.The bench restrained BMC and the state govt from taking further steps on the general body’s resolution until further orders.Asserting that “some spaces have to be kept open, otherwise the next generation will forget maidani khel (outdoor sports) and grounds”, it said, “You (BMC) tell us where people will play football now.”Mumbai Football Association (MFA) had challenged BMC improvement committee’s recommendation/proposal to change the reservation. On Aug 10, the civic body’s advocate orally said no steps would be taken on the proposal till the next hearing. HC then directed BMC to file its reply and adjourned the hearing to Aug 24. But on Tuesday, BMC’s general body approved the proposal. This prompted MFA to seek an urgent hearing.Senior advocate Zal Andhyarujina, with advocates Akshay Doctor and Ranjeev Carvalho, said the writ petition was specifically mentioned before the general body. “A question was posed if there is a stay. The answer was no. Therefore, they said ‘we will go ahead’,” said Andhyarujina. He said HC proceedings were not brought to the general body’s notice.Senior advocate Milind Sathe, for Mhada, which owns the land, said the plot was reserved for a convention centre from 1983-23. In the 2023 Development Plan, it was reserved partly for a garden/playground and for a school and an old age home. Mhada sent a request to BMC to “reinstate the convention centre”.The judges said on Aug 10, BMC had asked for an adjournment, adding that “the party which seeks adjournment does not precipitate matters.” “If elected people or authorities are going to jeer at the courts, it is something bad. So we are going to do something suo motu, unless you turn back the clock to Aug 10,” said Justice Ghuge.Senior advocate Girish Godbole for BMC said Bhide would not be able to do it and he would immediately talk with her whether she could send a proposal to the general body “to recall the resolution for the time being”. The judges said the resolution can also be kept in “abeyance”.Later, Godbole said Bhide was not apprised by the law department of the developments at the Aug 10 hearing. When the item regarding the ground came up for discussion on Tuesday, the general body passed a resolution. “The commissioner did not know what had transpired in court. The commissioner’s problem is that under MMC Act, she cannot ask the general body to suspend or recall the resolution. The general body is supreme,” he said. Godbole said the general body only took a decision to publish an advertisement inviting objections and suggestions for change of reservation. “All I can say is that there are six further steps before the reservation is changed,” he added.The judges noted that the petitioner had trusted BMC’s statement made in court. “It is unfortunate that [it] was not communicated to the authorities…”The judges issued notices to the respondents and adjourned the hearing to Sept 18.
