Mumbai: Dubbing them “a selfish lot” who are not bothered about people’s lives, Bombay HC has directed occupants of the top 18 floors of a 34-storey building in Tardeo which do not have an occupation certificate (OC) to vacate their flats in two weeks. A bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Arif Doctor said it is “brazen illegality” on the residents’ part to occupy the flats in Willingdon Heights without an OC, and directed BMC to initiate appropriate action if the order is not complied with. It said “affluent” flat buyers “who have taken the law into their own hands in occupying construction which has no OC are a selfish lot who not only with open eyes are acting contrary to the building regulations but also have the means to defeat legal action” being taken by BMC. Slamming the residents for setting a “very bad example” to protect construction that has no OC, HC said they appear to be least bothered about their own lives. “If this be so, how can they be bothered about anybody else in the event of any untoward incident taking place?” it said, adding that such an approach, which is wholly contrary to the law, “needs to be deprecated”. “We clarify that such members would be entitled to reoccupy the tenements only after an OC is granted,” it said on July 15. The order was uploaded on Saturday. The petition was filed by Sunil Jhaveri, a resident of the building, also known as Thakkar Tower, at Tulsiwadi, alleging gross illegalities. The building has no fire NOC and only a part OC for floors 1-16. BMC had flagged illegalities in the construction of floors 17-34, including amalgamation of the 26th and 27th floors. On March 27, HC had granted ad interim protection. Senior advocate Sharan Jagtiani, for Jhaveri, submitted notices issued by BMC from 2011, including over lack of a fire NOC and directing removal of unauthorised constructions. In Jan 2020, occupants of floors 17-34 were directed to vacate their flats in seven days. Jagtiani argued that while steps are being taken from floors 1-16 to regularise the violations, there can be no justification for persons to occupy floors 17-34 without an OC. Senior advocate S U Kamdar, for BMC, said the illegalities would be required to be restored in conformity with the original plans. There is no justification for the building’s residents, particularly those on floors 17-34, to continue their occupation, he said, adding that the occupation of the entire building in the absence of a fire NOC is extremely dangerous. Senior advocate Dinyar Madon for the housing society urged HC to permit residents to continue occupation for some time on humanitarian grounds so that they can seek regularisation of illegalities and obtain an OC. To the judges’ query, he said a year may be granted. The judges said if the proposition is accepted, “we would render the entire statutory regime requiring strict compliance wholly nugatory and inconsequential”. “This would amount to recognition of lawlessness, insofar as occupation of the buildings, with no occupation certificates are concerned,” the bench said. Vacating the March 27 protection, the judges rejected Madon’s request to stay the BMC order. They noted that the occupants were asked on several occasions to make alternative arrangements, which “was emphatically made known to them”. They posted the hearing of the plea of occupants of floors 1-16 for July 29 and directed BMC to “stay its hands in resorting to any demolition under the notices”.
